[AndyJackson]

I could have bought an argument that dragging out and enforcing a 100 year old law that has long been in abeyance, overcome by events, etc. is unconstitutional and that after such a long hiatus for the public to have "notice" that that is now the law the legislature needs to pass a new statute.

But a judge just making up stuff and calling it "Science" to write decrees from the bench is judicial fascism. She is substituting her morality for the will of the people expressed through the legislature the elected.

[Torahman]

Who is the judge? What’s her story?

[cmj328]

What a terrible argument. It’s been in abeyance for 50 years due to judicial tyranny.

[cmj328]

Your argument punishes the pro-life side precisely for using peaceful means to overturn the bad court decision.

You might as well say that post-Brown, local courts should have ruled the 14th Amendment was in abeyance since 1896.

[7thson]

"a 100 year old law that has long been in abeyance, overcome by events, etc. is unconstitutional"

How is it unConstitutional?