It's like watching Sesame Street...
Posted on 08/19/2022 10:52:50 AM PDT by Morgana
A Michigan judge ruled that county prosecutors cannot enforce a near-total abortion ban on the books since 1931, ruling in favor of Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
Lawyers representing the governor had asked the court to grant a temporary restraining order after the judge held a two-day evidentiary hearing.
Judge Jacob Cunningham granted Whitmer's request for a preliminary injunction, arguing not issuing this injunction would cause harm to the public.
"This court finds it is overwhelmingly in the public's interest to let the people of the great state of Michigan decide this matter at the ballot box, assuming the constitutional amendment initiative is on the ballot on Nov. 8," Cunningham said during the Friday hearing.
On Aug. 31, the state's board of canvassers will meet and announce whether a constitutional amendment protecting abortion rights will be on the ballot in November.
"While today is welcome news, my team and I will remain vigilant in protecting reproductive freedom," Whitmer said in a statement about the ruling. "The sad reality is that a number of leaders in the state are actively looking for ways to make sure Michigan's draconian 1931 law, which bans abortion for all women, doesn't include exceptions for rape or incest, and criminalizes nurses and doctors who offer reproductive care, is the law of the land. I am proud of my team today, but our work continues."
Cunningham, reading a written statement, said that not upholding the temporary hold on enforcement of the ban would cause "irreparable harm" to the people of Michigan. Cunningham also said that the defendants would suffer "zero" harm from the court preventing them from enforcing the abortion ban.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
“This court finds it is overwhelmingly in the public’s interest to let the people of the great state of Michigan decide this matter at the ballot box”
Well, generally speaking isn’t that how laws get on the books? Legislators are elected and then legislate, yes?
Or did the law in question somehow magically appear out of nowhere?
Why bother with having a Supreme Court decide anything since judges rule the country?
The real play here is this:
The Rat judge is working with the Rat Governor and SOS to get this on the November ballot. The rats have perfected the strategy of getting high Dem turnout ballot initiatives on November ballots and nothing will get the rats out like an abortion vote. So the rat Governor, AG and SOS will benefit with this move.
Not surprised. This is a descending state with enthusiastic socialists all over the place. No offense to my brothers and sisters on FR a number of miles outside the leftist enclave of Southwestern Michigan. I run into 85% Dem voters all day.
So, a law ON THE BOOKS ALREADY is old sounding because it was PASSED in 1931. The judge doesn’t think people “feel” like obeying it.
So kill pre-born babies all they want until the drooling mob of feminists and their baby daddy wimps vote to enshrine abortion on the next set of law books.
Lucky for them we “feel” like obeying the other laws on the books. Most of them. Usually.
Michigan law allows their Supreme Court to issue advisory opinions?
True, all of this.
I was part of the 10,400 vote victory margin for Trump in Michigan. Then wild eyed enraged anti-Trump Dems vowed never to allow that again.
The chance to freely kill babies by abortion as “a woman’s right to choose” is the ONLY issue on hundreds of repeated TV ads for Whitmer versus Tudor Dixon here. Not an exaggeration.
By the way, as the court filing showed, Gov. Whitmer herself had to prove she herself would be harmed by the 1931 existing law being enforced. Stupid judge somehow agreed she would.
Some stupid you can’t fix.
The Michigan SC has not gotten invoked. They are supposedly a 5-4 Republican majority but they have a pattern of allowing lower court rat judges run wild. They did it with Covid, the 20 election steal and now this.
This is kind of good in a twisted way ..... it sets up Whitmer to be kidnapped again.
It’s not good for the babies scraped out of their mother’s uterus.
But as long as Whitmer and her group are in power, unborn babies are not protected.
So 1st priority is to throw out Whitmer, then prosecute her for participating in a kidnapping scam.
I posted and linked evidence years back that aborted baby remains were used as “active ingredients” in anti-aging cosmetics.
The whole sh*t show of abortion reeks of Satanic Sacrifice.
Here’s someone that caricatures the lunacy of this abortion BS:
https://newtube.app/user/Hostage/6riCWIf
Stupid judge “
Not stupid part of the team.
The civil war has begun. It’s showing itself big time in the judiciary at state and federal levels. All stemming back to 2016 and a corrupt DOJ. Faith in law has become non existent.
What an asshat.....the People of Michigan have ALREADY decided their choice, with a Law on the books.
This jackass has (as nearly all Judges today who are OWNED and/or Activists) unilaterally decided that the Law should not be Enforced, and that HE has a "better idea". He didn't Rule on the Merits at all, and just is following his orders from the Deep State.
As far as "no harm", he totally ignores the FACT that thousands of innocent lives of babies still in the womb, will be MURDERED at HIS orders.........
I look forward to the FBI kidnapping her, too.
Federal agencies have that kind of power, and stupidity.
That's fine, but you don't block a 90-year-old law in the interim.
Think about the precedent that would set. All that Democrats have to do is claim the people should decide via amendment and poof... They can get an existing law suspended.
-PJ
Yes, Frank, that is true.
Detroit holds >50% of the votes in Michigan.
Here in Saginaw Valley, cooler heads prevail but they won’t on this issue.
If you ain’t farming, you are a UAW member.
This is a case of lazy liberals being surprised.
The question that WON”T be asked is, “When SCOTUS ruled in 1973, State laws such as the one in question were “automatically” found ‘of no effect’. Why did the legislature not remove it in 1973? Why didn’t the residents (people) of Michigan immediately petition to have the law rescinded?”
:: All that Democrats have to do is claim the people should decide via amendment and poof... They can get an existing law suspended. ::
Or, maybe even a Constitutional amendment involving firearms...
Excellent catch. Law was not removed in 1973.
If only people like you and I were the majority in Michigan again.
Did hear that some still here say “inflation” is their voting issue more than “abortion.” A little hope.
It's like watching Sesame Street...
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.