Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court Won't Rehear Va. Abortion Ban Case
ap on Yahoo ^ | 9/2/05 | Michael Felberbaum - ap

Posted on 09/02/2005 10:50:46 PM PDT by NormsRevenge

RICHMOND, Va. - A federal appeals court Friday denied a request by Virginia's attorney general to rehear a case challenging a state law banning a type of late-term abortion.

In June, a divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Virginia's law banning what anti-abortion activists call "partial-birth abortion" is unconstitutional because the law lacks an exception to protect a woman's health.

The Center for Reproductive Rights challenged the law when it was passed by the General Assembly in 2003, and a federal judge blocked its enforcement.

Following the appellate panel's ruling, Attorney General Judith Williams Jadgmann filed a petition asking all 13 judges from the court to rehear the case, saying the state believed the panel's majority decision was "fundamentally flawed."

The full court, in refusing to rehear the case, pointed to a U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a similar Nebraska law in 2000 because it did not contain a health exception protecting the mother.

"Our office is carefully reviewing the opinion and reviewing our options," Jadgmann said in a statement. She said Virginia's law is "distinct and distinguishable from any considered by the United States Supreme Court."

The state still can ask the Supreme Court to review the decision.

The type of abortion at issue is a procedure generally performed in the second or third trimester in which a fetus is partially delivered and its skull is punctured.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: 4thcircuit; abortion; ban; court; partialbirth; pbaban; rehear; ruling; virginia

1 posted on 09/02/2005 10:50:47 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"The type of abortion at issue is a procedure generally performed in the second or third trimester in which a fetus is partially delivered and its skull is punctured. "

They mean that the BABY HUMAN BEING is MURDERED!

2 posted on 09/02/2005 10:56:27 PM PDT by de Buillion (Perspective: 1880 dead Heroes in 3 yr vs. 3589 abortions EVERY DAY , 1999, USA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: de Buillion

The BLUE Meanies are going to be difficult to discredit (amongst their own) and sadly just as difficult to dislodge from their positions of power corrupted!


3 posted on 09/02/2005 11:02:09 PM PDT by Birdsbane (If You Are Employed By A Liberal Democrat...Quit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Partial birth abortion is hideously evil. Most of these innocent victims are viable outside the womb, but are painfully murdered instead of being allowed the very first right granted in the constitution. The RIGHT to LIVE! If a woman has been able to carry a baby that far along, I have a hard time believing she can't finish the job. The liberal credo is that murderers and rapists have more rights than an innocent baby.


4 posted on 09/02/2005 11:37:55 PM PDT by Just Lori ("A people that values it's privileges above it's principals soon loses both. " Eisenhower 1/20/53)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

"A federal appeals court Friday denied a request by Virginia's attorney general to rehear a case challenging a state law banning a type of late-term abortion."

Good news from a court for once...


5 posted on 09/03/2005 3:59:04 AM PDT by guitarnick40 (When a liberal is in doubt, all they do is scream and shout.... "it's Bush's fault")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
...law banning what anti-abortion gun-control activists call "partial-birth abortion" "assault weapons"...

Now there's something you won't see in an AP report. They'll just use the gun-control propaganda term without quotation marks and without attibuting it to a particular lobby. Different story when it comes to something they're in favor of, though, isn't it?

6 posted on 09/03/2005 11:00:16 AM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: de Buillion

Just a reminder from the skunks in the courts that we'll have to keep them on our list. Don't worry people we'll straighten you out in due time.


7 posted on 09/03/2005 11:04:08 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (The quisling ratmedia: always eager to remind us of why we hate them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: guitarnick40
Good news from a court for once...

Good news? The court had struck down the state's PBA ban, and it refuses to change its mind.

8 posted on 09/03/2005 11:05:19 AM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: inquest

The vote to deny rehearing en banc was 9-3. One of the judges who voted to deny rehearing was Michael Luttig who was a favourite of so many conservatives for SCOTUS nomination. Surely he has written that he voted against being bound by Sternberg v. Carhart but somehow 3 other conservative judges (Widener, Niemeyer and Shedd) voted to grant rehearing and 2 of them (Widener and Niemeyer) clearly stated their support for Virginia law.


9 posted on 09/03/2005 11:35:26 AM PDT by JackTom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: inquest

The vote to deny rehearing en banc was 9-3. One of the judges who voted to deny rehearing was Michael Luttig who was a favourite of so many conservatives for SCOTUS nomination. Surely he has written that he voted against being bound by Sternberg v. Carhart but somehow 3 other conservative judges (Widener, Niemeyer and Shedd) voted to grant rehearing and 2 of them (Widener and Niemeyer) clearly stated their support for Virginia law.


10 posted on 09/03/2005 11:36:07 AM PDT by JackTom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: inquest

Sorry, that was a total brain interruptus on my behalf. I totally mistyped what my mind was thinking as I was doing other things....sorry:

Once again judicial activism takes hold and the libs legislate from the bench.

is what I meant to say.


11 posted on 09/03/2005 10:50:12 PM PDT by guitarnick40 (When a liberal is in doubt, all they do is scream and shout.... "it's Bush's fault")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson