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

To: Brilliant

The holding:

“Measured against these standards, Art. 1196 of the Texas Penal Code, in restricting legal abortions to those ‘procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother,’ sweeps too broadly. The statute makes no distinction between abortions performed early in pregnancy and those performed later, and it limits to a single reason, ‘saving’ the mother’s life, the legal justification for the procedure. The statute, therefore, cannot survive the constitutional attack made upon it here.”


23 posted on 10/15/2007 5:06:35 PM PDT by enough_idiocy (www.daypo.net/test-iraq-war.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: enough_idiocy

Yes, but you’ve got to read all of the cases. Read the parental notification cases. Read the partial birth abortion cases. The general rule is that you can’t regulate abortion, and that is what Roe has been held to say. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule. Eventually, the courts found a watered down parental notification law they could uphold (to save themselves from being tarred and feathered) and eventually, they found a partial birth abortion law they could uphold, but not without throwing out a bunch first. The exceptions in the case of the “right” to abortion have been very few and far between.


29 posted on 10/15/2007 5:16:17 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

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