While I don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade, and I wholeheartedly support this action by the court, I’d caution us all to remember that this is the kind of stuff that really motivates the right to get out and vote. We won’t be truly free until we drive a stake through father’s heart in November!
8 Likes
No doubt Scalia is palling around with that other great Hunter in the sky -Nimrod.
1 Like
But why so little details?
I am ecstatic the unconstitutional law was placed on hold, but I’d like more details on how the SCOTUS actually blocked it…but I do agree it is a good decision in a constitutional sense!
But we do NEED the 9th member onboard!
2 Likes
One part of the law requires all clinics in the state to meet the standards for “ambulatory surgical centers,” including regulations concerning buildings, equipment and staffing. The other requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.
Officials in Texas said that the contested provisions were needed to protect women’s health. Abortion providers responded that the regulations were expensive, unnecessary and intended to put many of them out of business.
1 Like
Could be, but the court simply tossed in the stay the lower court on the same basis they did for the Texas case they heard oral arguments on earlier this week and did a primary vote on today in chambers.
Only Thomas indicated in today’s action in the Louisiana case that he would have let the lower court ruling stand and let the law go into effect. Hardly a surprise there.
3 Likes
I read that over at SCOUTSblog, and the “difference” is really nothing. That Texas’s has been in effect for several months while Louisiana’s was technically in effect for 9 days is hardly a substantive difference int he law as it pertains to the merits of the cases.
2 Likes
Funny, Texas requires non of that for colonoscopies or liposuction, which have a far higher incidence of complications than medical abortions. Gee, wonder why Texas law only applies to clinics that provide abortion services, even ones that don’t do surgical abortions?
The fig leaf excuses for these laws is just that a fig leaf (aka a dissembling lie).
8 Likes
Was there some sort of vote? Of the 8 people on the court, was there a vote that was X for and Y against?
Should a reporter mention such things?
2 Likes
Which is why they’re referred to as TRAP laws, Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers.
10 Likes
The vote was 7-1, Thomas being the “1.”
The court votes on whether to uphold or reject a lower court stay in a pending case. For this outcome 5 members had to back staying the lower-court’s ruling that had basically shut-down all but one abortion clinic in the state.
We don’t know who those 5 were, but we can pretty much guess it was the liberal 4 jurists and Kennedy.
that doesn’t mean however that Kennedy is on the side of striking down the Texas law in the case that had oral arguments earlier in the week, but a a tentative hopefully “tea leaf” sign, but very very much in the tea leaf arena of the weakest sort.
1 Like
No it wasn’t (we don’t know the actual vote totals).
We only know that five voted to put a stay not he lower court (the number it would require to do so).
1 Like
“Over the lone dissent of Justice Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court on Friday afternoon blocked the continued enforcement of a Louisiana law that required doctors who perform abortions to have a professional right to send patients to a hospital within thirty miles of their clinics.”
2 Likes
Coulda sworn the lyric was even more perfect, with a gorgeous internal rhyme – “he’s not merely nearly dead, he’s etc.” – but the entire internet seems to think I’m wrong. Stupid internet. (I’ll have to check YouTube later…)
1 Like
Yes, the lone dissent, as in written decent. It doesn’t mean the court voted 7-1. Could have been 5-2, or 6-2 with Thomas writing a dissent.
Which only underscores the point that reading this as a tea leaf on how the Texas case will be decided is a fool errand. Because I am willing to bet good money that Alito, and Roberts are not going to vote to overturn the Texas law.
I don’t think anyone is reading this as a presage on Whole Woman’s Health. Alito and Thomas are givens and I doubt that Roberts will stray from his anti-abortion stance. That leaves Kennedy and I don’t have any confidence in him. OTOH, I have no objection to being pleasantly surprised.
Actually the full text of the “written dissent” consists of “Justice Thomas would deny the application.”
I’d caution us all reading this post to remember that we’re the tiniest of slivers of voters, and the overwhelming majority of voters pay no attention to SC actions, unless the media has hyped the decisions.
This is an act that will pass unnoticed by the majority of voters. Wrongly, of course, but still…not going to have any effect on votes in November.
2 Likes
Let the joyus news be spread; the wicked old Warlock at last is dead!
1 Like