Posted on 12/10/2021 9:48:52 AM PST by SmokingJoe
The Supreme Court has left the historic Texas “heartbeat” abortion law in effect.
The majority opinion was signed by Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett.
John Roberts sided with the Liberal Justices in dissent.
In the ruling, the Supreme Court is allowing Texas abortion providers to sue over the Texas heartbeat law.
CNBC reported:
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that a federal lawsuit by abortion providers challenging the legality of Texas’ new abortion ban can proceed before the law is enforced against anyone, at least against some currently named defendants.
However, the Supreme Court allowed the Texas law to remain in effect during that challenge, which will proceed in a lower federal court.
The law, which empowers private citizens to sue, for at least $10,000, anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion, went into effect in September. But has not been enforced against any provider yet for terminating the pregnancy of a woman after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, usually around six weeks or so into gestation.
The court in its 8-1 ruling allowing the suit to proceed noted that “other viable avenues to contest the law’s compliance with the Federal Constitution also may be possible and the Court does not prejudge the possibility.”
The Biden administration’s challenge to the law was dismissed 8-1.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
I wonder if the justices can point to the portion of the Federal Constitution that addresses abortion.
How so?
Christian practice is not the same as acts of aborting babies in the womb capable of feeling pain.
The Texas law is specific to abortion after a certain time.
Try extending that law to other issues. You will fail. Try passing new laws using the same tactics, you won’t be able to. Any law allowing lawsuits against a Constitutional right will fail.
Abortion is not in the Constitution. It has no standing in the Constitution.
once again, Roberts stabs our Constitution (and all of us) in the back!!!
he is just AWFUL
Yet another nonsense legacy from Jorge Bush.
his Obamacare order read like he was high on drugs, one sentence didn’t even logically support the next
I really think someone powerful on the extreme left has something on him (or has simply bought him off)
imho
The reason for that part of the law was to try to prevent anyone from suing the state of Texas to overturn the law. Since no one is ever punished, sued, or prosecuted by a Texas state official under the law, the hope was that no one would ever have standing to attack the law in Federal court. It appears that SCOTUS just gutted that strategy by giving abortionists standing to sue Texas.
Personally, I approve of what SCOTUS did, not because I'm for abortion, but because if that strategy stands it will used and abused by other states for nefarious purposes. For instance, another state could give private citizens the right to sue anyone who says something non-woke about an LGBTQXYZ123 person.
Roberts doesn’t hold traditional conservative judicial beliefs.
Every huge case he is a goner to us.
The Obamacare debacle...now this, siding with liberal fanatics regarding abortion.
That’s just weird but it’s something if it means fathers can sue if their child is terminated.
I was highly impressed at how well and with good humor she kept the house and made her vicarious siblings do their part and told her so. She treated me like a visiting prince after that.
This is a legal procedural approval and not the final “Roe” challenge, which will come later.
Why should those abortion providers that get Federal funds be allowed to sue the State of Texas? You might as well say the Federal Government lawsuit is still active.
I understand which is why I said I feel for the children.
But purchasing is illegal whereas adopting is not.
If rumors are true, what Roberts did was illegal and he knew it was illegal. That puts him in a position to be compromised. His actions imply the possibility he is compromised.
For later.
> “another state could give private citizens the right to sue anyone who says something non-woke about an LGBTQXYZ123 person.”
Ridiculous, never happen. And if it did it would be crushed on appeal.
The lawsuit against TX will proceed and fail because it will preempt the State from deputizing its people from enforcing its laws. Texas does not say abortion is at all times illegal, it says Texans can sue if a heartbeat is detected past a certain time. Such lawsuits are not guaranteed to succeed, hence no injury is created by the law. Filing a lawsuit is not in and of itself an injury.
This is not necessarily a victory for those who support the law in Texas. 8-1 the SCOTUS told abortion providers they can sue. They will now go back to a district court judge who has already ruled the law violates a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. I see this more like a process decision. This one is far from over.
Perhaps the specific example I gave would be overturned on appeal, but there are a host of ways that this legal tactic could be used to empower activists to attack people for exercising their constitutional rights. It doesn't matter if the lawsuits rarely prevail, just the right to sue gives activists an incredibly powerful tool to punish people they don't like and would have a chilling effect on constitutionally protected activity.
Besides, federal courts don't like legal gimmicks that take their power away, so I'm pretty sure this tactic will not be allowed to stand, at least not in its entirety.
And Texas will go to another District Court who will rule for them. It will be appealed all the way to the Supremes where they will lose
Meanwhile, the SB8 law is in effect. That's what counts.
It is. The SB8 law is in effect right now. It wasn't before.
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.