Posted on 07/07/2022 1:12:18 PM PDT by Ebenezer
(The Center Square) — The Louisiana Supreme Court rejected a request from Attorney General Jeff Landry to enforce the state's abortion ban as a legal challenge moves forward in Orleans Parish Civil District Court.
Justices voted 4-2 to deny a request from Landry and Louisiana Department of Health Secretary Courtney Phillips to lift an order by Orleans Civil District Court Judge Robin Giarrusso issued last week that prevents the state from enforcing its ban on abortions.
The Shreveport abortion clinic Hope Medical Group for Women, physicians, Medical Students for Choice and others challenging the law allege it's unclear both in terms of exceptions and when it takes effect, while Landry argues the plaintiffs are "willfully misreading clear terms in the law in an attempt to manufacture arguments that the statutes are unconstitutionally vague."
A hearing in the case is scheduled for Friday morning. Louisiana is one of 13 states with "trigger laws" that automatically ban abortion in response to the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade.
Justices Jefferson D. Hughes III, Piper D. Griffin, James T. Genovese, and Scott J. Crichton joined in the majority to deny Landry's motion to reinstate Louisiana's abortion ban "at this preliminary stage of proceedings, while Hughes argued that intervening now is "procedurally premature."
Justices William J. Crain and Jay B. McCallum argued in dissent that the plaintiffs have failed to show irreparable injury from the law, while it's obvious abortion is irreversible.
"I believe the circumstances of this case compel us to review the propriety of the temporary restraining order. The plaintiffs have asserted that they, as doctors, will suffer irreparable harm if the 'triggering' statutes that prohibit abortions go into effect," Crain wrote. "The contrasting interest is that alleged life will be terminated if the prohibitory statutes do not go into effect.
"While whether these doctors will suffer irreparable harm by being prohibited from performing abortions is debatable, terminating alleged life during the period of the temporary restraining order is irreparable."
McCallum wrote that "there has not been a showing that immediate irreparable injury would result before the opposition could be heard and, accordingly, the (temporary restraining order) was improvidently granted."
Chief Justice John Weimer recused himself.
Landry responded to the Supreme Court's decision on Twitter.
"We have fought for 50 years to overturn Roe – we will have the patience of Job, but make no mistake we will prevail!" he posted. "Louisiana Supreme Court is delaying the inevitable. Our Legislature fulfilled their constitutional duties, and now the Judiciary must. It is disappointing that time is not immediate."
Louisiana Right to Life Executive Director Benjamin Clapper also weighed in with a prepared statement.
"The Louisiana Supreme Court let Louisiana citizens down by not decisively defending our laws from pro-abortion delay tactics," he said. "Echoing Justice Crain's compelling words, every day this temporary restraining order remains in place leads to more babies lost from abortion."
Pro-choice advocates like state Rep. Royce Duplessis, D-New Orleans, championed the decision.
"I think it's a massive win for the women of Louisiana," Duplessis said, according to WDSU. "It's a sign of justice and a beacon of hope for reproductive rights here in Louisiana."
More than a dozen physicians, including former Department of Health Secretary Rebekah Gee, have submitted sworn affidavits in support of the preliminary injunction blocking the state's abortion ban, with many arguing the law breeds fear of prosecution and inhibits state medical schools from property training OB/GYN residents, the Louisiana Illuminator reports.
Pelican State ping
With the ruling from the SC set in stone, why do these judges want to try and override them?
Irreparable harm is caused to the babies who are aborted.
Immediate and irreparable harm is one thing. What about a likelihood of success on the merits? Who knows? Louisiana is weird.
You’re telling me. Three of the four justices who ruled against the request are Republicans.
The people who told us for decades that SCOTUS established the authority of abortion are now the ones to ignore SCOTUS.
Probably because they think they can get away with it?
After all how many police units do the Supremes have?
It was a procedural vote to require the case to first be taken up in the lower court. Yep, there are fetuses that are injured in abortion, but in the legal system, about 99.9% of the time, cases have to move up the judicial ladder. The court didn’t rule in favor of abortion, the court just said the case couldn’t skip ahead to the LA Supreme Ct.
So, basically, the Louisiana Supreme Court is saying that it’s not its turn yet to rule on enforcement of the abortion ban until lower courts have their say. I would have thought the state’s Attorney General would have known about this judicial-review process before going straight to the LSC.
Rogue court!
The courts are dependent upon the funding from the legislature, cut their budget to zero. They can hold court in a high school gymnasium for pro bono.
The AG (Jeff Landry) is running for governor next year. He’s going to do whatever it takes to build up his bona fides with the conservative base. BTW, I’ll be voting for him.
Every single republican judge should be asked point black by those nominating them, what their stance is on abortion. And ONLY those who are pro-life should EVER be nominated by a Republican.
Here is Jay McCallum’s opposing opinion. I’ve known McCallum since he was a state representative 30 years ago. Been in state district court a couple of times while he was presiding. Knows how to run a courtroom. He’s pretty good people, for a lawyer.
https://www.lasc.org/opinions/2022/22-1038.CD.jbm.grant.pdf
So to speak.
This is a state case is about whether law banning abortion meets state constitution requirements.
This is exactly what the U.S. Supreme Court intended.
The state cannot properly train OB/GYN physicians without them performing abortions?
SCOTUS turned the question of abortion back to the states. They said there was no federal right to an abortion.
Now the states get to fight it out.
This is how it should be.
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.