"...Pennsylvania law that women needed permission from their husbands to get an abortion..."
Didn't the law in question simply require informing the husband (with lots of exemptions)?
"'...Pennsylvania law that women needed permission from their husbands to get an abortion...'
Didn't the law in question simply require informing the husband (with lots of exemptions)?"
Good catch and very astute of you. Yes, this is a lie this news publication is telling that the law required a woman to GET permission. It was merely a notification measure. The husband had no veto according to the law. But as usual the MSM and its sloppy journalism gets it wrong. Or was it a more purposeful smear?
In any event, all Alito ruled on was the constitutionality of PA voters being able to decide on this law which was a ballot measure. It said nothing about the constitutionality of the law itself. And Alito was perfectly justified in ruling that PA voters had every right to decide this because it truly does not infringe on a woman's supposed right to kill her children.
Anyway, it's too bad Alito didn't stand firm on this and explain his reasoning because it was entirely justified. But we conservatives have been backed into a corner for being conservatives now in the witchhunt atmosphere Dems. and their media lapdogs have created against everything and anything conservative. I cannot believe the Dems have gotten us to the point where we have to apologize for being conservatives.
Anyway, who cares I guess? Hopefully Alito is just lying and will get on the court and hammer abortion laws. Hacks like Snowe deserve to be lied to in their defense of the indefensible, i.e. abortion of a living child. I'm sick and tired of judicial candidates having to kneel at the alter of baby murder to pay homage to the feminist sacrament of infanticide. Anyone advocating such a position requires being lied to in my opinion if it means getting past them to end federally-mandated abortion. They are not deserving of truth, candor and least of all respect.