Posted on 02/07/2019 7:51:10 PM PST by MNDude
WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court stopped Louisiana from enforcing new regulations on abortion clinics in a test of the conservative court’s views on abortion rights.
The justices said by a 5-4 vote late Thursday that they will not allow the state to put into effect a law that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.washingtontimes.com ...
The power of men in black is absolute apparently.Nobody is allowed to question the ussc.Nobody.
Roberts is the reason why it’s so important to replace RBG with another strong conservative justice chosen by President Trump.
RBG is what stands between Roe v. Wade and overturning the same.
Which says all you need to know about “republican” presidents.Even RR got duped.The rest were rinos.
Soros has photos of Roberts with little boys.
We never had the sumbitch.
This is only a stay pending appeal, not an ultimate disposition of the case.
The law in question requires a doctor performing abortion to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, which critics alleged "would result in only a single abortion doctor in the entire state."
The actual SCOTUS Order says:
Because the filings regarding the application for a stay in this matter were not completed until earlier today and the Justices need time to review these filings, the issuance of the mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, case No. 17-30397, is administratively stayed through Thursday, February 7, 2019. This order does not reflect any view regarding the merits of the petition for a writ of certiorari that applicants represent they will file.
That's it, in its entirety.
And the Kavanaugh dissent states:
I respectfully dissent from the Court’s stay order. In this case, the plaintiffs raised a pre-enforcement facial challenge to Louisiana’s new admitting-privileges requirement for doctors who perform abortions. The Fifth Circuit rejected the plaintiffs’ facial challenge based on that court’s factual prediction that the new law would not affect the availability of abortions from, as relevant here, the four doctors who currently perform abortions at Louisiana’s three abortion clinics. In particular, the Fifth Circuit determined that the four doctors likely could obtain admitting privileges. The plaintiffs seek a stay of the Fifth Circuit’s mandate. They argue that the Fifth Circuit’s factual prediction is inaccurate because, according to the plaintiffs, three of those four doctors will not be able to obtain admitting privileges. As I explain below, even without a stay, the status quo will be effectively preserved for all parties during the State’s 45-day regulatory transition period. I would deny the stay without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ ability to bring a later as-applied complaint and motion for preliminary injunction at the conclusion of the 45-day regulatory transition period if the Fifth Circuit’s factual prediction about the doctors’ ability to obtain admitting privileges proves to be inaccurate.
* * *
In order to resolve the factual uncertainties presented in the stay application about the three doctors’ ability to obtain admitting privileges, I would deny the stay without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ ability to bring a later as applied complaint and motion for preliminary injunction at the conclusion of the 45-day regulatory transition period. The Court adopts an approach—granting the stay and presumably then granting certiorari for plenary review next Term of the plaintiffs’ pre-enforcement facial challenge—that will take far longer and be no more beneficial than the approach suggested here. I respectfully dissent from the Court’s stay order.
JUSTICE THOMAS, JUSTICE ALITO, JUSTICE GORSUCH, and JUSTICE KAVANAUGH would deny the application."
Roberts wrote nothing.
Spot On. We’re left drawing a bad card without a replacement to the phantom, RBG. Roberts has no conscience, for whatever the reason.
Good for you.
Spot On. We’re left drawing a bad card without a replacement to the phantom, RBG. Roberts has no conscience, for whatever the reason.
So.... Apparently all of Louisiana has a grand total of 3 clinics and 4 doctors. The “complaint” worries that 3 of the 4 doctors would get bounced for not currently having admitting privileges. All this jumping around and screeching and condemning and legislative action and repeated judicial challenges, all because 3 doctors in an entire state might have to do a little actual work to gain admitting privileges. Amazing.
Interesting.
All I knowmis that whatever the exact story is, it all revolves around the kids he adopted.
He didn’t vote down the law like the writer from the liberal AP tried to slip with his wording byline. In the article it states:
“Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s four liberals in putting a hold on the law, pending a full review of the case.”
The law is not tossed out, nor is it put in place. I appreciate Roberts wishing to take the time to get a good review on the law before it is voted up or down.
We made the same mistake in congress by their passing the healthcare bill before they read it and we see what that debacle caused. Give it time for a review. You may see that it was not voted the way the writer wants to have you perceive. There are many issues to consider like state’s rights, historical case history, the wording of the bill, and many others. It has to be done legal for them, not moral. He’s just doing his job correctly.
rwood
It’s as plausible as it can be, with no more proof than we have.
It would answer a lot of questions.
Something like this has been out there. I’ve seen something along these lines.
For me, there are so many things out there, that I sometimes tune some of it out. This is one of those cases.
Others are more up to speed on it than I am.
Going back though, we don’t really know. Wish we did.
Roberts would be found to be unfit to serve if he was blackmailed and he altered his opinions as payoff for silence.
I agree with you. You know, I could blame Reagan for O’Connor too, but in truth he doesn’t know these people. He gets recommendations, and who knows how much else.
I think he was set up on this one.
It’s a trap Trump needs to avoid too.
Why didn’t Roberts let the 5th circuit decision stand, then?
W
Look, the problem is, that our presidents don’t know these individuals. They get recommendations and do their best. I don’t like W, but I can’t say anyone else could have avoided this trap.
Reagan was urged to appoint Sandra Day O’Conner too. Gack...
He was told she was sound. They lied to him, unless she went south after her appointment.
That can happen too.
Lol. Sort of.
Gorsuch voted with Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh
But He was chief justice so who was going to tell him otherwise. RBG is not chief justice.
Also Renquist made Sandra Day O’Connor retire before him.
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.