4th Circuit Court upholds SC abortion law allowing access to clinic records

WIS TV ^ | 9/20/02 | AP

[Desdemona]

Ping

[gridlock]

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Robert King derided the regulation for "micromanaging everything from elevator safety to countertop varnish to the location of janitors' closets."

Yeah, intrusive government is a b!tch, isn't it.

Good to see the liberals getting some of their own back.

[agrace]

Good news! Bump.

[coloradan]

The appeals court said the provision is "so obviously beneficial to patients" that it could not rule it unconstitutional.

Judicial activism is dangerous. Some jurists might claim that banning guns "is so obviously beneficial" that it too should not be ruled unconstitutional.

The proper test in court for a law is whether it violates the Constitution, not whether it is beneficial.

(And, if it is not beneficial, the law should be overturned, the legislators who passed it removed from office, and possibly the Constitution amended so that future such laws will no longer be constitutional.)

[Gophack]

Go South Carolina!!!!!!!!!!

[Brookhaven]

The court also rejected the clinics' argument that the regulations, which cover standards ranging from door widths to air flow, are unconstitutionally vague.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Robert King derided the regulation for "micromanaging everything from elevator safety to countertop varnish to the location of janitors' closets."

Well,which is it. Are they vague or specific to the point of micromanaging everything?

The regulations probably are very specific. The people that drafted the bill probably anticipated that people would attempt to overturn the regulations by calling them "unconstitutionaly vague".

[Askel5]

These are heartening steps.

[concerned about politics]

The abortion providers argued that a provision requiring them to make clergy available for counseling coerces participation in religion and violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

Clergy has always played a big role at funerals. Where there's dead children, there should at least be a parting prayer available upon request.

[concerned about politics]

The abortion providers argued that a provision requiring them to make clergy available for counseling coerces participation in religion and violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

In other words, the abortion providers are denying the patients a "choice" to seek religious counceling. The abortion clinics "choose" for them. Pro-choice for death only. That's the rules.

[concerned about politics]

Insofar as the legislature in South Carolina wishes to limit the choices of its female citizens

Except for the choice to let the baby live. Then the woman has no choice there. Hail Hitler!

[FreeTheHostages]

Well, this decision has obvious political ramifications. But as a strict matter of law, this is the correct result. If the law provides that the records are confidential, than the putative privacy interest is fulfilled by the reg and it passes muster.

[CWRWinger]

"Insofar as the legislature in South Carolina wishes to limit the choices of its female citizens, it has been largely successful," King wrote. "South Carolina is not, however, entitled to adopt and pursue an anti-abortion agenda at the expense of constitutional rights."

The Constitution is not only written for the living, but for the generations to come which are yet unborn. King is obviously from the culture of death. His conscience is sheared, he has lost his soul.

[montag813]

"WOMEN'S PRIVACY" = DEAD BABIES

"WOMEN'S PRIVACY" = INCEST AND STATUTORY RAPE HIDDEN

[Lancey Howard]

When the scumbags of the left need ammo to blackmail a legislator, they can always count on Planned Parenthood to make available any records which may show that the wife or daughter of that legislator (or candidate) ever had an abortion. Then that legislator goes "pro-abortion" without explanation.

Now, at least in South Carolina, it will be easier to find out who is being blackmailed.

[pray4liberty]

"South Carolina is not, however, entitled to adopt and pursue an anti-abortion agenda at the expense of constitutional rights."

Part of those constitutional rights are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This particular Judge seems to have forgot that little detail.

[pray4liberty]

Now, at least in South Carolina, it will be easier to find out who is being blackmailed.

Now, that observation is interesting, to say the least!

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

This is an interesting ruling, in that the rationale given by the Supreme Court in legalizing abortion in Roe v. Wade was based upon a woman's right to privacy. It seems contradictory to allow abortions based on that right and then violate the privacy in this other manner. Something has to give. Sadly, I doubt it will be a woman's right to kill her unborn baby.

[let freedom sing]

Bump and ping

"PP-- The Cover-up is Over". Coming to a state near you.

[holden]

...violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

Did we miss the implicit claim that abortion clinics are part of the gubmint? Indeed, abortion mills are rife with political agents working hand-in-glove with legislators and public officials (yes, even through blackmail as described in #15 by Lancey Howard).

Government needs to get out of the business of killing its citizens. Then, it won't be a state-subsidized (shielded) venture. Abortion mills couldn't exist absent federal political support, subject to unbiased courts and state and local civic opinion (i.e., voting patterns).

HF