Maybe it is time that we start considering justices without religious affiliations. It was unbecoming to see these three, supposedly learned men, throw logic, reason and intelligence out the window by pretending that the clinics were closed due to an over abundance of concern for women's health instead of a naked attempt to inflict a type of Sharia law on all non believing women. Must we be subjected to this charade every time a moral argument comes before the court and these three Christians blindly accept whatever diaphanous, disingenuous, dumb argument like minded religious zealots present to the court. Whether it's Abortion, Hobby lobby or any other secular legislation that they find some back door excuse to block it is unbecoming to watch and harmful to the court's legacy. I swear, a pastor could get caught strangling his wife and they would have us believe that they might have be open to the suggestion that he was just messaging her larynx.
2
About 11,000 murders take place by year using a gun. About 700,000 pregnancies are ended per year by abortion. Time for a Republican 25 hour sit in.
4
This SCOTUS decision is a victory for honesty. The overlooked issue in these various state laws is that they were passed because of how poorly the Democrats have done in winning majorities in state legislatures and in winning governors' chairs. The DNC has dropped the ball in this area, while the Republicans, the Tea Party, and other extreme conservatives have simply out-organized Democrats. In truth, Sanders's run for President could serve some good if he would lead an effort to organize progressive efforts on a state level. No doubt it is less ego gratifying than running for President, but the work must be done; and it is hard work. But if we want a functioning democracy, then centrist as well as progressive Democrats must take back control of state politics. These outrageously dishonest attempts to circumvent settled law, a woman's right to choose, are just examples of the dysfunction. More important, state legislatures draw the congressional district maps. Many Republican Representatives cannot be defeated because Republican state legislatures designed their districts. When Sanders says that the system is rigged, he is only scratching the surface. We can criticize a do-nothing Republican led Senate and House, but they did win those majorities. Whose fault is that? Democrats must get back to genuine grass roots politics. "All politics is local" is a truism for good reason. Winning the White House is not enough to effect important lasting change.
6
I have always said, the "Pro-Life" people only care about "life" from conception to birth. After that, you are on your own, kid.
13
No more Alitos please. No more ridiculous right-wing ideologues, also known as Republicans, whose nominees pretend to be impartial and fail to address any real questions during confirmation hearings. That happened once with Alito, should be remembered, and should not happened again. I wonder how Harriett Miers would have voted if she was on the Court for this.
15
Donald Trump, the poster boy for pro abortion, continues to represent the
Republican Party, its Guns and its Poses. Is this a great country, or what?
Republican Party, its Guns and its Poses. Is this a great country, or what?
3
Dear Supreme Court. Thank you.
16
The solution is so simple. If you are opposed to abortion don't have one. If I am a slave to my gender by not having control of my reproductive rights than I am a slave to your religion in a country that claims separation of church and state. Keep your religion to yourself.
22
The solution is so simple: If you don't want a baby, don't get pregnant. Keep your legs closed and exercise some self-control. If you're old enough to have sex, then you're old enough to know better.
Even an atheist can believe that an unborn child is just that: a child. It doesn't take religion to understand that, if left alone, that "mass of cells" cannot grow to be nothing other than a baby. That's why it's illegal to break a Bald Eagle's egg: Because by doing so, you are killing Bald Eagle. Or, is that too complicated to understand?
No, the answer is simple: If you don't want a baby, then don't get pregnant. There wouldn't even be an argument to have, if people could just learn to act responsibly in the first place, not make excuses, and stop relying on such a barbaric safety net.
This whole "victory" thing is just distasteful. I feel like I need a shower just for heaving read many of the comments here. Ew.
Even an atheist can believe that an unborn child is just that: a child. It doesn't take religion to understand that, if left alone, that "mass of cells" cannot grow to be nothing other than a baby. That's why it's illegal to break a Bald Eagle's egg: Because by doing so, you are killing Bald Eagle. Or, is that too complicated to understand?
No, the answer is simple: If you don't want a baby, then don't get pregnant. There wouldn't even be an argument to have, if people could just learn to act responsibly in the first place, not make excuses, and stop relying on such a barbaric safety net.
This whole "victory" thing is just distasteful. I feel like I need a shower just for heaving read many of the comments here. Ew.
2
"Monday’s ruling should spell the end for many if not most of these regressive, unconstitutional laws."
Should, but won't.
Should, but won't.
7
That is because the Supreme Court refuses to recognize that anyone has standing to challenge the most blatant example of constitutionally gratuitous faith-based legislation of all: the act that inserted the words "under God" into the national loyalty oath recited every school day for three generations since 1953.
When that falls, the rest of the festering pile of faith-based legislation will melt away.
When that falls, the rest of the festering pile of faith-based legislation will melt away.
15
It's so encouraging to see our high court produce a rational, humanistic decision that will better the lives of tens of thousands of people. We are accustomed to seeing politically-skewed and deleterious judgments being handed down, so when the justices get it right and one or two of them break out of their rigid factions, it gives us hope that reason and justice can prevail.
14
And this is why the US and other western democracies are in such political turmoil. Elected representatives manipulate laws, courts and legislative bodies to support their personal views and bolster their power.
Texas legislators disingenuously stated the purpose of the bill was to benefit women's health while they intentionally created and implemented it to do the opposite.
Trust has been eroded. The frustration leads to irrational lashing out. Facts become weapons not starting points for solutions.
Texas legislators disingenuously stated the purpose of the bill was to benefit women's health while they intentionally created and implemented it to do the opposite.
Trust has been eroded. The frustration leads to irrational lashing out. Facts become weapons not starting points for solutions.
11
And what about all the women who have died from 'safe and legal abortions"? Those women's families would undoubtedly argue that their beloved's abortion was not one of the safest medical procedures out there. Does anyone ask what exactly caused those closed clinics to be "unable to meet the admitting privileges" ? Like a dirty floor? Perhaps AC that might not work? Or maybe forceps that had not been sterilized? Could it be the jars of fetal remains stacked up in the hallway? Who knows for sure. But I can tell you I don't go to a dentist that doesn't pass those standards so why would I want to go to any other healthcare provider that doesn't adhere to those standards?
2
@ Dawn
Does your dentist have admitting privileges at a local hospital?
I bet not.
The Texas restrictions were not called TRAP laws for nothing.
The were passed solely for the purpose of severely restricting access to abortion services.
The AMA and The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists opposed them. They realized, as did SCOTUS, that the law imposed restrictions on women's' clinics that were not required of other outpatient ambulatory surgical centers but also that after the clinics closed poor women in rural Texas had no where to go for their contraception, cervical and breast cancer screenings, pre-natal care etc..
The law had absolutely nothing to do with "protecting women's health" and everything to do with the Texas Republican legislatures ant-choice obsession.
Does your dentist have admitting privileges at a local hospital?
I bet not.
The Texas restrictions were not called TRAP laws for nothing.
The were passed solely for the purpose of severely restricting access to abortion services.
The AMA and The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists opposed them. They realized, as did SCOTUS, that the law imposed restrictions on women's' clinics that were not required of other outpatient ambulatory surgical centers but also that after the clinics closed poor women in rural Texas had no where to go for their contraception, cervical and breast cancer screenings, pre-natal care etc..
The law had absolutely nothing to do with "protecting women's health" and everything to do with the Texas Republican legislatures ant-choice obsession.
19
What's the big deal? Its like removing a freckle from your back.
4
There are only two things that have been proven to reduce abortion rates:
1) Comprehensive sex education
2) Universal access to birth control
On both fronts, we have a long way to go.
1) Comprehensive sex education
2) Universal access to birth control
On both fronts, we have a long way to go.
18
And those things are often opposed by the same people opposing abortion...Oh lawdy, some of these people
12
The contrived abortion law that was just struck down by the court is representative of the same type of intellectual fraud perpetrated by those championing Voter ID laws and the voter suppression movement. In the instance of Voter ID, three instances of voter impersonation over 10 years may be used as justification for disenfranchising 500,000 voters in every election.
In both instances, everyone knows the underlying purpose of the legislation.
However, too often, the right wing of the Supreme Court in reviewing these patently obvious cons makes contrived arguments in order to hang their ideological preferences upon them, as Alito, Thomas and Roberts did in this abortion case. The Editorial Board is correct. This should have been a unanimous decision.
The court made the correct decision yesterday. It should go forward and apply the same type of standards it established in this case to expose and dismantle the obstacle to voting that has been built using the same tainted bricks,
The justices that participate in these deceptions disgrace themselves in the eyes of history, and damage the institution.
In both instances, everyone knows the underlying purpose of the legislation.
However, too often, the right wing of the Supreme Court in reviewing these patently obvious cons makes contrived arguments in order to hang their ideological preferences upon them, as Alito, Thomas and Roberts did in this abortion case. The Editorial Board is correct. This should have been a unanimous decision.
The court made the correct decision yesterday. It should go forward and apply the same type of standards it established in this case to expose and dismantle the obstacle to voting that has been built using the same tainted bricks,
The justices that participate in these deceptions disgrace themselves in the eyes of history, and damage the institution.
15
It seems to me that making birth control and abortion difficult to obtain is simply an attempt to declare that pregnancies that fail mean that women can rightly be declared inhuman so that their human rights may be ignored.
These battles to declare females inhuman are ancient and probably a permanent kind of destructive prejudice.
These battles to declare females inhuman are ancient and probably a permanent kind of destructive prejudice.
9
I am really, really curious:
Unless I'm wrong, a "victory" is cause for celebration...
Why are the Editorial Board of the New York Times and many, many people in these comments so happy about killing babies?
If this is "victory,' then... What does failure look like?
Last night, my friend's three-month-old preemie passed away. I guess the people here cheering for dead babies are happy about that, too?
This barbarous and disgusting. Every life is valuable. And, it's no one's "right" to take that life away.
Shame on you, NY Times. And, shame on you, peanut gallery, as well!
Unless I'm wrong, a "victory" is cause for celebration...
Why are the Editorial Board of the New York Times and many, many people in these comments so happy about killing babies?
If this is "victory,' then... What does failure look like?
Last night, my friend's three-month-old preemie passed away. I guess the people here cheering for dead babies are happy about that, too?
This barbarous and disgusting. Every life is valuable. And, it's no one's "right" to take that life away.
Shame on you, NY Times. And, shame on you, peanut gallery, as well!
4
Girl, even though you're a grown adult, you clearly still need this spelled out for you:
Abortion is not killing babies. And yes, choosing abortion is a right--a Constitutionally guaranteed right (like, 4 times over now) that is utilized by a woman with the support of her healthcare provider. It literally-- (and I hate using that word, but it applies)--LITERALLY has no impact on any other person, anywhere, ever. It is about a woman and her body. End of story.
And no, nobody here is celebrating the death of a premature infant--you're your own freak for thinking that in your sick, twisted head.
And if "every life is valuable" to you, you better be the first person on the front lines when it comes to improving public education for children, healthcare for children, SNAP benefits and quality food benefits for children. Because if you aren't, you're nothing more than a hypocrite. And girl, we all know how Jesus felt about hypocrites--eye planks, casting stones, and whatnot.
Abortion is not killing babies. And yes, choosing abortion is a right--a Constitutionally guaranteed right (like, 4 times over now) that is utilized by a woman with the support of her healthcare provider. It literally-- (and I hate using that word, but it applies)--LITERALLY has no impact on any other person, anywhere, ever. It is about a woman and her body. End of story.
And no, nobody here is celebrating the death of a premature infant--you're your own freak for thinking that in your sick, twisted head.
And if "every life is valuable" to you, you better be the first person on the front lines when it comes to improving public education for children, healthcare for children, SNAP benefits and quality food benefits for children. Because if you aren't, you're nothing more than a hypocrite. And girl, we all know how Jesus felt about hypocrites--eye planks, casting stones, and whatnot.
10
Oh Silly Person. Babies are not being killed. And you know this.
And by the way? You are not curious. You are just another busy body willing to tell an adult female human being that YOU will personally force her to bring her child to term. That is all you are.
And by the way? You are not curious. You are just another busy body willing to tell an adult female human being that YOU will personally force her to bring her child to term. That is all you are.
10
No one is killing babies. Blastocysts, embryos and fetuses are not babies. Where is your concern for the actual babies born into poverty?
21
And where are these Texas politicians once unwanted babies are born? They're voting against Medicaid, SCHIP for children's health insurance, affordable child care and pre-school, properly funded public schools, etc. The correct term for these fundamentalist patriarchs is "pro-birth, anti-life." There is certainly nothing "pro-life" about them.
19
How delicious to gloat and ridicule one's opponents!
2
June 28, 2016
A major victory for all the new born children loving wanted by parents: able and willingly guiding a path delivering human rights be all three hearts. Our nation is much brighter in this universal victory by long awaited law.
JJA Manhattan, N. Y.
A major victory for all the new born children loving wanted by parents: able and willingly guiding a path delivering human rights be all three hearts. Our nation is much brighter in this universal victory by long awaited law.
JJA Manhattan, N. Y.
3
June 28, 2016
Explicit to say: forced to bring an unwanted child to birth has never been just as an option for adoption as remedy. The greater mystery of all life is best left to the heart firstly the mother and father at best with conscious towards life's lessons to live with in soul, spirit, and mystery.....
jja Manhattan, N. Y.
Explicit to say: forced to bring an unwanted child to birth has never been just as an option for adoption as remedy. The greater mystery of all life is best left to the heart firstly the mother and father at best with conscious towards life's lessons to live with in soul, spirit, and mystery.....
jja Manhattan, N. Y.
2
Men! Men are bums: they say they’ll be there for you, but where are they?
It's been said before but is worth saying again: If men could get pregnant abortions would be legal, period. And, by the way, I'm a feminist because my mother was a woman.
13
Just to take this discussion to a place where it's needed - the Olympics and the Zika virus. The recent bill to provide funding was riddled with anti-abortion and anti-birth control measures. In a rare show of moral courage, the Democrats in the Senate managed to block this latest Trojan Horse.
In a program at the Stanford Law School on May 17 ("Zika and the Age of New Pandemics: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Perspectives," sponsored by Stanford's Center for Law and Biosciences, Center for Innovation in Global Health), Dr. Paul Blumenthal (and others) pointed out an ominous fact: in the U.S., the "mosquito zone," is precisely where abortion is most difficult to obtain. This situation is outrageous, yet in Brazil it's even worse. If a woman aborts a fetus with microcephaly, she is subject to a prison term of 4 1/2 years!
My point is, this ruling was a victory, but it's a very small victory when the scope of the issue is looked at. Abortions are very difficult to obtain for too many women, and the shaming of women who get abortions is truly barbaric.
One other point. Please, a fetus is not a child. It is a fetus, a growth on the inside of a women's body. A little science in the face of ignorance won't hurt, will it?
In a program at the Stanford Law School on May 17 ("Zika and the Age of New Pandemics: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Perspectives," sponsored by Stanford's Center for Law and Biosciences, Center for Innovation in Global Health), Dr. Paul Blumenthal (and others) pointed out an ominous fact: in the U.S., the "mosquito zone," is precisely where abortion is most difficult to obtain. This situation is outrageous, yet in Brazil it's even worse. If a woman aborts a fetus with microcephaly, she is subject to a prison term of 4 1/2 years!
My point is, this ruling was a victory, but it's a very small victory when the scope of the issue is looked at. Abortions are very difficult to obtain for too many women, and the shaming of women who get abortions is truly barbaric.
One other point. Please, a fetus is not a child. It is a fetus, a growth on the inside of a women's body. A little science in the face of ignorance won't hurt, will it?
27
Conservatives should cheer this powerful decision in favor of deregulating health care providers! Oh, lest we forget, some conservatives are in favor of regulating everyone and everything, including women's bodies, except themselves, their businesses, and their economic interests. No fly, no gun, no way! But, a victim of rape or incest seeking to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, we need strict regulations for that. What hypocricy!
30
What Daniels these justices! They decide that the voting rights act could be gutted, that money qualifies as free speech, that bribery is merely innocent favors, that politicians may be bought , and that unborn children simply do not count as human beings. Truly, wise justices! A veritable tribe of Daniels.
2
A fetus is not a child, except in the teachings of a few religions.
6
What is 'it' then? a goat perhaps? A dog has puppies, a cat has kittens, a cow has a calf and a mother human has a child human growing in them.
It is called viability. Look it up. It makes your lies look really pathetic.
7
I've always had difficulty reconciling how a party that exhibits disdain for the impoverished--particularly those who require safety net programs to achieve food and shelter security--also advocates for limited or blocked access to abortions, which affects disproportionately and almost exclusively poorer women. --Ashamed Republican Woman
17
Everyone should read Alito's absurd dissent in order to realize that unless HRC is elected, the future Supreme Court would likely be largely comprised of similar justices.
25
Alito speaks for his Catholic faith. So much for separation of church and state.
3
Women voters, take note. There is only one way to preserve your rights and access to care. Go to the polls in November and deliver an unmistakable message to the Republican primitives who would turn back the clock to the 1950s. Enough is enough.
28
FACTS FIGURES & THE LAW Outweigh the mendacity of the GOP well-paid operatives to carry forth with the Great Lie about the medical safety of abortion clinics. The fact is that women are 14 times more likely to have medical complications from childbirth than from abortion. So to say that a law restricting access to abortion is intended to improve medical safety for women is an out and out lie. The justices of the Supreme Court recognized that fact. If the opponents of women's rights truly were concerned about the wellbeing of women they would advocate for equal pay for equal work. They would advocate for increased gun safety so that women and their family members would be safer. If they were interested in helping women, they would advocate for programs to provide education for children starting during the prenatal period and fund free daycare. But the GOP operatives are far more interested in tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires than in advocating for women and the rest of the 99% who are being ripped of by the 1%. What I am always surprised by is the self-defeating positions of GOP ideologues who have claimed since 1980 that they were pro family. That was just another one of their huge lies. GOP ideologues have hitched their wagon to a monster who does not mind being compared with Hitler, confuses 7/11 with 9/11, tweets that Paris is in Germany and thinks that women who breastfeed or use the toilet are disgusting. Soon the GOP will be flushed down the drain.
16
Then we can have the one party state without any opposition that you'd like to have. After you eliminate the opposition to your leftist paradise, what then? We'll assume civil liberties have been eliminated and replaced by a mendacious leftwing bureaucracy of people like you who absolutely know what goes on in other people's minds and under the guise of public safety, or people being deluded by unacceptable ideas, will do the right thing. (Stalin from 1922-1930) Then when the opposition and guns, freedom of speech ect have been "flushed down the drain" the real fun will start. The ruling class will have to be purified and guess what, a self-righteous malcontent like youself will be the first to go to the wall. A small insignifigant sacrifice for the greater good. Long live Big Brother! Death to the reactionary counterrevolutionaries.
1
Take a deep breath Pal.
8
Now that they got cuffed, Red States scream "judicial overreach." These states deliberately taunted the Court as they pressed ahead with ever-starker restrictions on women's health. They overplayed their hand, again promising the Republican base things they could not deliver. This is why the GOP got Trumped.
13
There is no victory in being able to legally kill your child. I was adopted and I know. How come others do not have the right of legal murder?
4
A fetus is not a child. I too was adopted, but I am absolutely in favor of abortion rights.
6
The idea that abortion is murder is a religious doctrine. It has no basis in science or law, and is a relatively new for religion.
14
What is 'it' then? Cats have kittens right? A human mother has a human fetus living in them.
Pro-Birth not pro-life seems to be the stance of most people who are opposed to abortion. Abortion foes need to consider the care for the mother and child during pregnancy, at birth and beyond if needed. Anyone who is pro-life should adopt a child that would have been aborted and can't be cared for by the mother and/or father for whatever reason. Carrying a sign in front of an abortion clinic or preventing women from receiving safe, legal abortions does not represent a true pro-life belief. Pro-life words need to be followed up with pro-life actions.
16
Things are not that complicated. Just follow the common sense.
And men? They play no role in getting women
Pregnant? Even the best methods sometimes fail
So it's not always about women bring " smart"
Pregnant? Even the best methods sometimes fail
So it's not always about women bring " smart"
5
NOW we can celebrate! Reuters reports today that the United States Supreme Court upheld lower courts' decisions to block abortion access laws in three other states. This should be the end of it until WE pass the Equal Rights Amendment that prohibits ANY law that interferes with a Woman's Right to Choose what she does with her own body. Good Job, women of America and the men who love them and Good Job to the five forward-thinking justices on OUR United States Supreme Court.
12
This is a major win for a Woman's right to control her own body!
It is a horrific situation that women are forced to litigate such a fundamental proposition, there being no proportionate consideration for men.
It is a horrific situation that women are forced to litigate such a fundamental proposition, there being no proportionate consideration for men.
2
It is still shocking that three justices, including the Chief Justice, could dissent from the majority. The lack of reasoning in the dissents makes no sense - do they not know that they are not up for re-election?
11
The dissenters--Roberts, Alito, Thomas--should be held to the same standards of factuality and reasonableness as the decision requires of anti-abortion legislation.
6
I doubt many of those legislators pushing these anti abortion laws even believe in them. Rather they just continue to pander to the radical Christian right so they will keep voting for them. Thankfully the Supreme Court got it right yesterday.
10
Justices Alito, Roberts and Thomas,"offered unconvincing explanations for clinic closures. Perhaps, they postulated, older doctors in those clinics had decided to retire — on the very same day." With such absurd jurisprudence, these three should decide to retire.
16
Someone needs to explain to me how it is not hypocrisy for the Feds to claim that the right to end a (potential) human life is Constitutionally protected while the right to live a pain free life is not.
Every argument used to justify this decision; the fact that admitting privileges cannot be shown to have any medical justification, the fact that patients needing the requested treatment are grossly inconvenienced, the idea that people should have control of their own body, etc. all apply to the medical usage of marijuana. One can only assume that pregnant women are a more powerful lobby than persons suffering intractable pain.
I would love to see someone suing the Federal government on this basis, and resulting in a Roe v Wade like decision concerning treating pain and suffering.
Every argument used to justify this decision; the fact that admitting privileges cannot be shown to have any medical justification, the fact that patients needing the requested treatment are grossly inconvenienced, the idea that people should have control of their own body, etc. all apply to the medical usage of marijuana. One can only assume that pregnant women are a more powerful lobby than persons suffering intractable pain.
I would love to see someone suing the Federal government on this basis, and resulting in a Roe v Wade like decision concerning treating pain and suffering.
1
Wow. That is some crazy false equivalency.
2
thomas, alito and roberts have no shame. Making a statement, with zero evidence, that perhaps a bunch of old doctors retired on the same day is pitiful. They are an embarrassment to the legal profession.
13
If we can not restrict the made up right of abortion surely all of the liberal Democrats posting will agree that logically and rationally they must now support our explicit, unrestricted 2nd Amendment rights.
Why not? Or will massive hypocrisy be your fallback position as usual. Please explain.
Why not? Or will massive hypocrisy be your fallback position as usual. Please explain.
@William Boyer,
I answered this just a few posts back-- why do you keep repeating it?
I answered this just a few posts back-- why do you keep repeating it?
3
The Constitutional right to abortion is in no way inferior to the 2d amendment right of the states to maintain a militia. The Court has recognized that the right to an abortion can be regulated as long as the regulation does not put an undue burden on women seeking abortions. By the same token guns can be regulated by measures that do not unduly burden the 2d amendment. Or do you think some Constitutional rights are superior to others? Please explain where the Constitution says some Constitutional rights are more important than others. It doesn't.
10
hes on a mission from god
watch out
those folks are dangerous
watch out
those folks are dangerous
2
Anyone surprised how Alito and Thomas ruled on this one? In Thomas's case, he could probably save himself a lot of time by not bothering to sit for cases like this one. Just vote the way he already knows he believes. A sham and a shame that he's on a court that can have such a huge impact on all of our lives.
15
If anti-abortion politicians were serious about reducing abortion, they would double the funding given to Planned Parenthood which aims to give women full control over their reproductive life through contraception. Reliable contraceptive methods allow women and their partners to CHOOSE when to have children.
21
It is notable, when rule by lying is finally struck down by our judiciary, holdouts for the lie's underlying bias naturally remain, albeit on the margins, in their panic. And yet it seems all but inevitable when the most adventurous lie is finally the last straw, as in Lawrence v. Texas, that extraordinarily incorrigible sovereignty has furnished the cause.
1
Hopefully the logic of excess burden will carry over to the next challenge to the various voter identity laws that have been passed since SCOTUS gutted the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Just as House Bill 2's only purpose is to restrict abortions, the voter ID laws' only purpose is to generate political advantages for the GOP by stealing citizens' right to vote. Neither provides any benefit and both introduce unfair and inappropriate burdens to the exercise of rights guaranteed by the constitution.
11
I am beyond tired of the rhetoric of the right as it comes to women's Constitutional Rights to reproductive freedom in this country. I don't know what it will take to end it. One way would be to unilaterally throw out much of the restrictive rubbish that has been passed as law during the last few decades, and for courts to refuse to hear what are undeniably legal assaults under the guise of "women's health." Women of all ages have become complacent since Roe v Wade not understanding that the religious right and abortion opponents will stop at nothing including murder to achieve their goals. We have been quiet for far too long!
15
Like deja vu. Seeing the crowds of cheering women today. Back in 1973, we joyously celebrated the Roe v. Wade decision. The war for a woman's right over her own body was won. How naive we were.
24
An answer for all the people trying to equate this with Second Amendment:
You obviously haven't read what this ruling says. (Go over and read Linda Greenhouse, who explains it well.)
It says that you have to show *evidence* for your claim that there is a benefit to imposing a (constitutional) burden on the individual.
But it *doesn't* say you can't regulate abortion clinics or require licensed doctors to perform the procedure. It doesn't overturn a ban on certain kinds of abortions. It doesn't say, so far, that you can't require counseling or a waiting period.
So, calm down for a minute, and try to understand the parallels.
For example, if a law that says only a licensed dealer can sell firearms (or certain types) so that background checks will be performed, that would be perfectly OK under this type of ruling. But if the government only issued two dealer licenses per State, it wouldn't, because the stated reasoning doesn't comport with the effect. Get it?
It's pretty much, as has been said, "common sense".
You obviously haven't read what this ruling says. (Go over and read Linda Greenhouse, who explains it well.)
It says that you have to show *evidence* for your claim that there is a benefit to imposing a (constitutional) burden on the individual.
But it *doesn't* say you can't regulate abortion clinics or require licensed doctors to perform the procedure. It doesn't overturn a ban on certain kinds of abortions. It doesn't say, so far, that you can't require counseling or a waiting period.
So, calm down for a minute, and try to understand the parallels.
For example, if a law that says only a licensed dealer can sell firearms (or certain types) so that background checks will be performed, that would be perfectly OK under this type of ruling. But if the government only issued two dealer licenses per State, it wouldn't, because the stated reasoning doesn't comport with the effect. Get it?
It's pretty much, as has been said, "common sense".
11
Seems to me the three mouse-keteers on the right place support of the Republican party and some of its inhumane, prejudiced and self-enriching policies and practices above their oath to support the Constitution. Shame there is no higher court to call them out on that.
11
To me this should be characterized as a victory for a woman's control of her own body. Abortion is a part of that as is sterilization, in vitro treatments for pregnancy, egg donations, various contraceptive procedures, etc. Some of these I would never choose, but I cannot choose for another woman and I don't believe anyone else can either. The statement the Court made on its decision rightly cited the science on abortion procedures and left the moral ground to the individual. No one is forced to choose an abortion.
14
An even surface review of the opinions offered by the justices on the Texas abortion laws suggests that we urgently need a nonpartisan judge, like Judge Merrick Garland, elected to the Supreme Court. How does a Supreme Court Justice offer Trump-like logic, "Perhaps, he postulated, older doctors in those clinics had decided to retire--on the very same day"? A little too transparent for the highest court in the land.
10
A Major Victory against strangers from meddling and imposing any control on a woman's body (a form of rape?) and health needs.
Try invading a man's body with similar meddling and controlling laws and see what happens!
Try invading a man's body with similar meddling and controlling laws and see what happens!
14
Very disturbing that these three justices refused to be swayed by reason in such a clear-cut case. How can they be relied upon to provide rational non-partisan opinions on any case?
21
Another GOP sham of legislation shown and adjudicated for what it was... nothing more than the opportunity to oppress people of their due rights as previously ruled upon by SCOTUS...
Next up to be slammed... voter suppression laws.
Ironically, the GOP consistently claims to be the "high priests" and "sole defenders" of the Constitution, but then go show their true policies with ridiculous legislation at the state levels.
Next up to be slammed... voter suppression laws.
Ironically, the GOP consistently claims to be the "high priests" and "sole defenders" of the Constitution, but then go show their true policies with ridiculous legislation at the state levels.
8
The Church had to meddle with sex to prevent competition between revealed truth and truly enjoyable life. To condemn abortion in the name of sinful behavior and untold other-world punishments was one way to to it. An other was to burn people at the stake and to claim that the Sun circles around the Earth.
10
I'm pro life.Abortion for incest and rape to me is ok.Late term abortion is not ok.My problem is abortion should not be used as a form of birth control.Women are smart enough (or so I thought) to use birth control pills and/or condoms.
Most late abortions are for medical reasons. I agree abortion should be a considered decision but do think it cruel to force a woman to carry a maybe much wanted baby to term when there is no prognosis of more than a few hours/days life or a very seriously impaired life.
11
And now, let's get rid of all this nonsense and pass the Equal Rights Amendment. Everyone knows Roe v Wade is the stand-in.
9
The logical, practical, clear rationale for laws obstructing or forbidding abortion remains largely a mystery, or at least vague. Anti-abortionists have expended few words justifying or explaining their "no" rhetoric and compulsion. The religious fervor that once compelled anti-abortion ideology seems to be muffled of late. It is still offered up, but I've not heard anything like the Bible-waving zealotry of some years ago. We can infer the obsession with social control--not only of women, but by extension entire families--and the political necessity of stoking a key conservative wedge issue. But anti-abortion factions have risked losing more votes and credibility than they gained. It is difficult to conceive that a majority of women whose ownership of their reproductive bodies was disallowed by archconservatives will support them on a platform of other issues.
Many of those choosing to have clinic abortions are lower-income or single mothers. Where would have been decent educations, job opportunities, medical care, or loving, supportive families, for unwanted children who would have been forced into working class homes? Anti-abortionists have not been forthcoming. Perhaps we can deduce that, with few explicit or acceptable motives for this social engineering, the demographics interpreted by conservatives indicate that strict anti-abortion laws are another means to assure a supply of cheap mid-21st century labor, indentured debt slaves, and military personnel.
Many of those choosing to have clinic abortions are lower-income or single mothers. Where would have been decent educations, job opportunities, medical care, or loving, supportive families, for unwanted children who would have been forced into working class homes? Anti-abortionists have not been forthcoming. Perhaps we can deduce that, with few explicit or acceptable motives for this social engineering, the demographics interpreted by conservatives indicate that strict anti-abortion laws are another means to assure a supply of cheap mid-21st century labor, indentured debt slaves, and military personnel.
5
Roe v. Wade was a victory for abortion. The latest decision to strike down the Texas law isn't. It is merely a prevention of a relentless attempt- one of the many- by the religious right to erode the Roe decision. More than 300 years have past since the beginning the Age of Enlightenment, yet a great number of our citizens still insist that others follow their rules based on the former's blind faith.
33
Those who claim to have the "health and safety of women" in mind when passing these onerous and irrational laws restricting a woman's right to choose, are the same ones who rail against prohibiting gun ownership by those who have been convicted of domestic violence.
17
Well if we can't restrict abortion why can you restrict gun ownership. The abortion "right" is made up. The 2nd Amendment is an explicit part of the Constitution. Please explain to us.
1
Mr. Boyer: the Court has upheld many restrictions on the right to abortion. It simply said States cannot impose any "undue burdens" on that right. Would you agree that gun ownership should be subject to regulation so long as any restrictions do not place an undue burden on the 2d amendment?
8
Fine. All you have to do is become a member of a well regulated militia.
Visit your local recruiter.
Visit your local recruiter.
13
Republicans had no qualms about using an out-and-out lie as justification for these laws. Even though medical professionals contested the lies, many courts allowed the laws to stand. Republicans regularly say completely false things about opposition candidates, and keep repeating the lies. So now, in our culture, it is an accepted practice to openly lie to get what you want, and the free press does not challenge these lies.
14
I welcome this ruling and liberal support for it. Now they will stop trying to eliminate our 2nd Amendment rights. Won't they or will they respond with their usual monumental hypocrisy and irrational and dishonest arguments?
2
It was always interesting to compare two constitutional rights-one that allows people to own a gun and one that allows women the right to choose. With guns, there are laws to prevent research studies on firearms and they allow possible terrorists on watch lists to buy a gun because SOME PERSON may be denied their constitutional right WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. Women on the other hand needed to be 'protected' and if that meant hampering their rights for the greater good of....health? The court did the right thing and also called out hypocrisy.
22
How could Alito Roberts and Thomas vote in favor of this offensive, transparent, cruel and violent attack on women even if abortion violates every fiber of what they stand for, and what on earth does it mean?
5
Why are you surprised? That trio of old catholic men have consistently done everything they could to undermine the right to abortion. Clearly they're deciding based on their religion not the law.
15
Abortion is a made up right without constitutional or legal legitimacy. Every legal scholar knows that it was manufactured out of whole cloth by a liberal court that substituted ideology and personal feelings for law. This ruling also is made by a left wing court without reference to law or reason. Somehow liberals celebrate abortion clinics having lower standards then veterinary clinics. Abortion will never be settled law because it was created dishonestly and is an indefensible, intellectual and moral outrage. For those of us who still apply reason and have morals. The United States of America is, for all practicable purposes, ruled by one confused, willful and egotistical old judge on the court. SCOTUS like our whole political and government establishment does not need reform it is in need of revolutionary change. As the West spins apart and Muslim fanatics laugh with anticipation, our economies crash and our amoral, inbred, blind establishment plays their violins while singing kumbaya and modeling themselves on Pontius Pilate it may well happen. It won't be pretty.
4
Site your source that abortion clinics have lower standards than vet clinics. As the article said and as was argued, there are other surgical procedures like tonsillectomies, colonoscopies, etc. that are riskier than abortions and yet the clinics where they are performed aren't being held to the same standards. Besides, what difference does it make to you? You aren't able to get pregnant.
13
Nonsense. Every legal scholar will tell you that Roe v Wade is the law of the land and that the only way to reverse it is to pass a constitutional amendment. If you want to talk about decisions without any Constitutional basis you should start with those calling corporations "people" with the full rights of citizens.
13
Nonsense. That doesn't change the fact that it was a made up right, created by a liberal court without reference to the Constitution, law, precedent or traditions. It was imposed on the people in the same way any tyrant would do it and for that reason is illegitimate and will remain so despite your delusions.
1
I am always amazed by women protesting abortion who are completely willing to surrender control over their own bodies to conservative politicians! Perhaps they don't need Planned Parenthood's women's healthcare services. The bigger question is how these women feel empowered to exert control over the bodies of other women?
16
I am very pleased the Supreme Court decided as it has. As others have mentioned, these laws were never about the safety and health of women, they existed solely to make personal, medical decisions as difficult to enact as possible. No doubt, there was a huge, patriarchal desire to "punish" these women as well.
I am pleased, but also dismayed that in the year 2016 we still have to fight so hard for the inalienable equality of women. We must keep up the fight and remain vigilant. We must also be sure that Hillary Clinton secures the White House in November. Decisions like this illustrate why.
I hope that this may, finally, put an end to the spectrum of sleazy, fact-free Republican legal contortions when it comes to women's rights and reproductive freedom. The GOP is a political party that wishes to deny women full autonomy in their lives, yet also refuses to educate our populace with scientific-based sexual education, and also refuses to properly fund childcare initiatives and our social safety net.
The Republican party is a collection of sadistic misogynists. There really is no other conclusion I can draw.
I am pleased, but also dismayed that in the year 2016 we still have to fight so hard for the inalienable equality of women. We must keep up the fight and remain vigilant. We must also be sure that Hillary Clinton secures the White House in November. Decisions like this illustrate why.
I hope that this may, finally, put an end to the spectrum of sleazy, fact-free Republican legal contortions when it comes to women's rights and reproductive freedom. The GOP is a political party that wishes to deny women full autonomy in their lives, yet also refuses to educate our populace with scientific-based sexual education, and also refuses to properly fund childcare initiatives and our social safety net.
The Republican party is a collection of sadistic misogynists. There really is no other conclusion I can draw.
18
There is a faction in Texzs that has no respect for freedom -- they are a slave state.
6
Hopefully this will stop other states from attempting to eliminate abortions. The fact is - abortions have been legal for over 43 years now and those anti-choice folks need to just find some other private area of peoples lives to stick their noses into. Or maybe they can get lives of their own, or volunteer or maybe adopt children that are not wanted.
6
The real winner is the integrity of the Supreme Court. Our politicians and those with partisan ambitions have attempted to portray the Court as a set of partisan hacks pushing an agenda of electing public officials and pushing legislative agendas. Clearly, members of the court have their leanings and interpret the Constitution in different ways, but we've seen a Roberts Court affirm Obamacare, abortion rights in TX, and use of race in college admissions. Similarly, the courts firmly rejected the overreach of the justice department in the VA gov case and increase protections against police abuse in the Kingsley case. Finally, the courts are showing some resistance to government overreach in cases like the Hawkes case and most recently the tied vote on immigration. One can disagree with any of the cases but it seems clear that court is made up of deeply committed Justices who act personally and not through a partisan lens.
2
The vote for this should have been eight to nothing. Alito, Roberts and Thomas are so dogmatic they are willing to uphold a law that even the supporters say has no known benefit to women's health other then restarting access to services.
They had an opportunity to really bury this whole abortion issue forever, but they know Republicans use "abortion" as a wedge issue for elections and that is what their votes kept alive.
They had an opportunity to really bury this whole abortion issue forever, but they know Republicans use "abortion" as a wedge issue for elections and that is what their votes kept alive.
13
What do you expect from three highly political old Catholic men eager to serve their religion?
10
Women should be able to obtain an abortion without judgement and criticism. Just because someone is pro-choice, it doesn't mean that we crave abortions and feel nothing if we have one. It doesn't mean that we will ever get one. It doesn't mean that we are sluts or careless or shirking our responsibilities. It just means that as women we should have the constitutional right to choose what happens with our bodies.
As a child that grew up as a "mistake," I can tell you that being a mistake doesn't always work out so well for the child. Some people really shouldn't have children--even if you think it's their responsibility. I have my life, but it was terrible--full of physical and emotional abuse, drugatics, alcoholics, suicide, etc., and I now have a lot of emotional issues as an adult. This isn't a pity party; its just reality. My parents are prime examples of two people that were criticized and judged and ultimately shamed into having a child that they weren't ready to have. People are going to say, "Yeah, but you wouldn't be alive if they had an abortion." Well, my life stole two lives, and that math sucks.
As a child that grew up as a "mistake," I can tell you that being a mistake doesn't always work out so well for the child. Some people really shouldn't have children--even if you think it's their responsibility. I have my life, but it was terrible--full of physical and emotional abuse, drugatics, alcoholics, suicide, etc., and I now have a lot of emotional issues as an adult. This isn't a pity party; its just reality. My parents are prime examples of two people that were criticized and judged and ultimately shamed into having a child that they weren't ready to have. People are going to say, "Yeah, but you wouldn't be alive if they had an abortion." Well, my life stole two lives, and that math sucks.
58
When I was 16 my mother told me that I wouldn't have been born except for the abortion laws in effect at the time. What that did was to confirm my feeling into a fact that I wasn't wanted. It also gave me permission to cut myself to shreds with glass, razor blades, pencils, or any other sharp object. If I hadn't felt like having friends or intimate relations before that I certainly didn't after that revelation. I do wish I hadn't been born because my parents could have gone on to have better lives for themselves. I wouldn't be around with the empty life I have now, one where I have no friends or interest in finding any because I know that I wasn't worth having.
The people who believe that all pregnancies should be carried to term whether or not the child is wanted, the fetus is healthy, etc., ought to live the lives unwanted children live for at least a month. Learn how it feels to be considered a burden, to have it evident in every interaction with your family, to know that the only reason you are alive is not because you were wanted but because you were a mistake.
And yes, I have often wondered what I would do if I faced a situation where I wound up pregnant and couldn't afford to keep the child. My feelings were that I might carry the pregnancy to term and give the child up for adoption. However, those were MY feelings. My other feeling, when it came to friends was that I'd support their decision no matter what it was because they have to live with it.
The people who believe that all pregnancies should be carried to term whether or not the child is wanted, the fetus is healthy, etc., ought to live the lives unwanted children live for at least a month. Learn how it feels to be considered a burden, to have it evident in every interaction with your family, to know that the only reason you are alive is not because you were wanted but because you were a mistake.
And yes, I have often wondered what I would do if I faced a situation where I wound up pregnant and couldn't afford to keep the child. My feelings were that I might carry the pregnancy to term and give the child up for adoption. However, those were MY feelings. My other feeling, when it came to friends was that I'd support their decision no matter what it was because they have to live with it.
13
It would be nice if the Supreme Court decided to overturn the equally offensive North Carolina voter suppression law.
11
I am happy about the decision, but I agree that this should have been a unanimous decision. Three justices were unable or unwilling to see through the fact that these laws were intended to restrict access to abortion, not to protect women's health.
If these three justices are either not smart enough to see through simple perceptions, or unwilling to set aside their ideology, then almost half the supreme court is either incompetent or a political tool. That's a terrible reality for our country.
If these three justices are either not smart enough to see through simple perceptions, or unwilling to set aside their ideology, then almost half the supreme court is either incompetent or a political tool. That's a terrible reality for our country.
15
Yesterday a student at Muskingum College in Ohio was sentenced to life in prison without parole for suffocating her newborn daughter. Had she merely had an abortion a few months earlier, there would have been no crime.
4
Some countries and cultures recognize post partum depression/psychoses as a defense and do not sentence the woman to prison. I believe that the child has to be less than a month old. I don't know if these same countries offer assistance to the woman after she gives birth but I do know that these differences in understanding exist.
3
I would not call this victory for abortion rights. It should be a victory against the imposition of other people's religious beliefs. It is a victory over tyranny of the mind and the body of at least 50% of the US population. It is mind-boggling that we still have to fight for this.
I will never forget the look on the face of a young who walked to my shop. She told me with a big smile, I am happy today because Mr. Anthony Scalia has just passed away. It is very sad to have to wait for somebody to die in order to feel free.
I will never forget the look on the face of a young who walked to my shop. She told me with a big smile, I am happy today because Mr. Anthony Scalia has just passed away. It is very sad to have to wait for somebody to die in order to feel free.
15
The 8-0 Supreme Court decision in favor of McDonnell shows the progressive judges can be impartial. The Texas abortion ruling also shows that most of the conservative justices can't rise above politics!~
11
Alito's dissent reveals why the man doesn't belong on the bench: first and foremost, he makes his ideological decision; only then does he go about rationalizing it. (This, of course, is precisely why GW Bush appointed him.)
8
I've read some of Breyer,Kagan,Ginsburg and Sotomayor's decisions and I'm baffled why they are on the Court.
1
It's good that editorial boards and columnists have begun to call out individual Supreme Court justices, Alito in this case, for the bizarre logic they employ in their supposedly impartial rulings. There should be some sort of ongoing log of Clarence Thomas's writings. When pundits praise George Bush Sr. because he's in his dotage, and beneath it all he was sort of an alright guy, they should feel obligated to mention his appointment of Thomas, the gift that keeps on giving. That was the single most cynical act of a sitting President that I can recall.
9
First of all, if the politicians and others in these states were truly concerned about women's health they wouldn't try to prevent women and men from receiving accurate information about birth control methods. They wouldn't stand in the way of educating children about sex, reproduction, contraception, and sexual feelings. They would walk into abortion clinics and see that the conditions there are safe. If they saw things that were wrong they would try to get them fixed. What they have done instead is to force women and families to have children they don't want or can't afford. There is nothing worse for a child to be unwanted and alive in the family that doesn't want them. I know because it happened to me. My parents were not ready to have a child and they are middle class.
No child in this day and age should be unwanted. We have the technology and knowledge to prevent pregnancy and to end it. What we seem to lack is the ability to let women make their own decisions so we pretend to care about their health. This decision and the reactions to it show that it was not women's health that uppermost in politicians minds: it was a petty way of exerting control over a very personal decision, one that is between the woman and her physician, not the woman and the nation. The other issue that is never addressed is that if a woman doesn't want an abortion, no one can force her to have one. It's her body and her decision. The Supreme Court has confirmed this.
No child in this day and age should be unwanted. We have the technology and knowledge to prevent pregnancy and to end it. What we seem to lack is the ability to let women make their own decisions so we pretend to care about their health. This decision and the reactions to it show that it was not women's health that uppermost in politicians minds: it was a petty way of exerting control over a very personal decision, one that is between the woman and her physician, not the woman and the nation. The other issue that is never addressed is that if a woman doesn't want an abortion, no one can force her to have one. It's her body and her decision. The Supreme Court has confirmed this.
11
Regulating a constitutional right. NYT is now against such things this week. I find abortions and owning a gun both distasteful and harmful but I respect that the Constitution protects them both.
1
But abortion, even after this ruling, remains highly regulated while there is almost no regulation of gun ownership.
14
There are times when I wish I could be instantly teleported back to the US, and yesterday was one of those times. When I heard about the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the TRAP laws seeking to prevent women in Texas from obtaining abortions I was filled with emotion and wanted to be celebrating in front of the Supreme Court with my American sisters (men too) of all ages and walks of life. I live in a country where abortion is part of legal and accessible reproductive health services for women and is a private matter between a woman and her doctor. Even from afar it has been painful for me to watch the attempts by legislators in states like Texas to take back this right of women to control their own bodies. I gushed about this great news to a few French women friends last night, but didn't get much reaction as they just can't imagine that a country like the US could still be so backward looking as to want to take away this basic right for religious reasons- if they only knew...
45
First time I have read that Perry knew what he was talking about! Ooops.
4
to protect the health and safety of gun buyers, dealers, and their families, those seeking to purchase firearms should be required to deal exclusively with licensed dealers, to wait 72 hours before making a purchase, and to view graphic images of the victims of gun violence prior to making their purchases. In addition, those supporting gun control shall have the right to stand 20 feet from the entrance to each establishment selling guns to yell "murderer," "killer," "shame," and "we know where you live" at patrons entering the store. Further, gun dealers should be required to discuss alternative methods of "self-protection" including baseball bats, golf clubs, and pepper spray with potential buyers prior to any purchase. Further, each gun store must be at least 50,000 square feet, must have adequate means of egress and means of fireproof storage and fire suppression, and gun dealers must be required to obtain "selling privileges" under the purview of their local police chief. All of these regulations will help protect the health and safety of gun buyers and dealers and enable them "make an informed decision" while ensuring that those seeking to buy guns will have safe, legal access to guns. And if they can't purchase a gun in their local community, they can simply drive to New Mexico.
26
How could the intent of any law be more transparent. Look who was supporting it: antiabortion activists. I did not here anything about support from advocates of patient safety.
4
I'm proud of this victory which has the potential to secure fragile abortion rights for years to come. But we've seen that the ferocious grassroots energy of the anti abortion movement is not to be underestimated. GOP elected officials bow to them. Pro choice Democrats bend over backwards to describe ending a pregnancy as "tragic and painful", often with little to show for it. Corporate America doesn't hesitate to jump into LGBT battles. But they're only too happy to look the other way on abortion, in the hopes of ensuring there's no shortage of minimum wage earners with too many mouths to feed who don't have the luxury of focusing on much else. Let us not go back to sleep, the same way we've failed Roe vs Wade, and Casey vs Planned Parenthood.
Celebrate the victory, but be ready. Pro Life movement, as they call themselves, will be coming back relentlessly.
Celebrate the victory, but be ready. Pro Life movement, as they call themselves, will be coming back relentlessly.
44
This monster deserves to get whacked in the head with the constitutional prohibition of faith-based legislation.
6
This ruling should remind us of how much is riding on this upcoming election, with a seat on SCOTUS still open. Unless we can get another Democrat in the White House, we can expect more attempts of thwarting our basic rights by the many, many Republican legislatures across the country. They have successfully rigged the local election districts, to give them the majority. Now they have their sights set on getting a friendly conservative on the highest court in the land, in order to get their ridiculous laws upheld.
9
The Texas law posed no obstacle to people with sufficient means to hop on a jet, limo out to a clinic in a civilized state, get a simple procedure, get back in the limo, and jet home. Since the Texas law had no impact on the wealthy, Roberts is OK with it. Alito and Thomas are just mean, miserable human beings.
14
I taught this case to a high school class last semester. Every student read the briefs on both sides, listened to the recordings of oral arguments, and easily came to the conclusion reached by the majority on the Court.
Even the lawyers for the State of Texas couldn't keep an entirely straight face when trying to defend what was clearly a contrivance designed to make abortion much more difficult.
Shame on Roberts, Alito and Thomas for having neither the integrity or wisdom of a group of 14-17 year old students.
Even the lawyers for the State of Texas couldn't keep an entirely straight face when trying to defend what was clearly a contrivance designed to make abortion much more difficult.
Shame on Roberts, Alito and Thomas for having neither the integrity or wisdom of a group of 14-17 year old students.
14
"nor wisdom" Sheesh, and I'm an educator!
3
Perhaps the tide has turned on the anti abortions screed. Let us hope so. The typical nays were the Crusaders, Cardinals Allioto, Roberts and the house fool Thomas. Someone needs to remind these clowns the crusades were a dumb idea and were lost.
11
There is so much at stake in the upcoming election and it is certainly not just about abortion rights. What we are seeing is the Republican Party making an utter shambles of the “of, by and for” foundation of our government. A genuine, caring political party would see to the needs of those it governs and the Republicans are failures.
4
While this ruling is certainly welcome, the fact remains that women are still subjected to medically unnecessary, expensive and invasive obstacles to obtaining an ostensibly Constitutionally-protected abortion in every red state across the nation. Mandatory vaginal ultrasounds are tantamount to state-sanctioned rape of women: they are prohibitively expensive for poor women and are medically absurd and unnecessary. Their sole purpose is to impose expensive and humiliating tests upon a woman, in an effort to thwart her decision to obtain an abortion. 72 hour waiting periods, fraudulent "medical counseling" scripts rife with lies and fear-mongering, reflect right wing legislative efforts to dictate the practice of medicine and thwart a woman's right to obtain an abortion. We have a very long battle ahead, and the latest efforts incorporate outlawing telemedicine for medication abortions where there are no available health clinics. It is imperative that we elect a Democratic President and flip the Senate to blue, so as to assure that women's ability to direct and elect our own medical choices is uncensored and unfettered by right wing religious extremists, who should have zero say in private matters.
62
The next step is to send Cornyn, Cruz, and the half-wit representatives who represent the people of Texas packing.
7
And you have Cardin,Mikulski and Donna Edwards.Wow,that's a real trio of unsuperstars.
If you believe that a fetus is not a human being, then this is a reasonable decision. It seems clear that the Texas regulations were designed to restrict access to abortion services.
But if you believe that a fetus is a human being - the most vulnerable human being - then the decision may be unreasonable. While it protects the rights of women to have greater control over reproduction, it does so at a heavy price - the fetus loses the most fundamental right, the right to life.
The question is: do those who believe a fetus is a human being have the right to impose this view on others? This is a very difficult question, which this, and most other commentary, skirts. It is unequivocal that society does have the right to forbid murder. A parent who killed or seriously neglected an infant after the child was born would be considered by most to be guilty of a heinous crime. Most who oppose abortion feel as they do because they consider abortion to be the taking of a human life.
There is no facile answer here. But to write, as this editorial comes close to suggesting, that the 3 dissenting justices were misogynist villians, is not correct. For now, Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to free access to abortion is the law of the land. But it is a complex issue with the strongest moral underpinnings, and I don't think the issue will go away.
But if you believe that a fetus is a human being - the most vulnerable human being - then the decision may be unreasonable. While it protects the rights of women to have greater control over reproduction, it does so at a heavy price - the fetus loses the most fundamental right, the right to life.
The question is: do those who believe a fetus is a human being have the right to impose this view on others? This is a very difficult question, which this, and most other commentary, skirts. It is unequivocal that society does have the right to forbid murder. A parent who killed or seriously neglected an infant after the child was born would be considered by most to be guilty of a heinous crime. Most who oppose abortion feel as they do because they consider abortion to be the taking of a human life.
There is no facile answer here. But to write, as this editorial comes close to suggesting, that the 3 dissenting justices were misogynist villians, is not correct. For now, Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to free access to abortion is the law of the land. But it is a complex issue with the strongest moral underpinnings, and I don't think the issue will go away.
2
The belief that life begins at conception is essentially a religious belief. As I read the Constitution, nobody has the right to impose his or her religious beliefs on others. Everyone is entitled to follow his or her beliefs, as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. Some people forget that the law of the land is the Constitution, not the bible or any other religious tract.
16
I just experienced a distinctly unpleasant few moments listening to Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of the tendentially labeled "Susan B. Anthony List," fulminate about the dangers of abortion to women's health in facilities failing to meet Texas-grade standards that more appropriately apply to neuro or cardiovascular surgery.
Dannenfelser denies that the absurd Texas standards have any purpose other than to deny women access to constitutionally guaranteed health care. If the purpose were to assure the highest standard of care for women, then Texas would be raising the bar for such discrete procedures as vasectomies, colonoscopies and wart removal.
I should be old enough not to be shocked by a campaign of outright lies, yet the serial baldness of "pro life" mendacity continues to catch my breath.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Dannenfelser denies that the absurd Texas standards have any purpose other than to deny women access to constitutionally guaranteed health care. If the purpose were to assure the highest standard of care for women, then Texas would be raising the bar for such discrete procedures as vasectomies, colonoscopies and wart removal.
I should be old enough not to be shocked by a campaign of outright lies, yet the serial baldness of "pro life" mendacity continues to catch my breath.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
13
Let's not feel to smug. You can bet ALEC has a bag full of back-up laws to send out to the Red States to stop abortion. And our legal system favors them. They can pass laws and it takes 3 years to overturn them. Or in the latest case, even though Casey was basically the same as the latest decision, Casey was ignored and the Pro-Fetus crowd went about business as usual.
Look at the Civil Rights Act. The Confederacy simply ignored it, and still does, forcing law suits every where to enforce it. And this latest decision on abortion rights will not be implemented for years...decades?..while the angry old men drag their feet, and their appeals, in front of angry old men in the courts.
Look at the Civil Rights Act. The Confederacy simply ignored it, and still does, forcing law suits every where to enforce it. And this latest decision on abortion rights will not be implemented for years...decades?..while the angry old men drag their feet, and their appeals, in front of angry old men in the courts.
9
Really, just curious: In this age of strong, empowered women, a growing movement of lesbian women, of readily available condoms, morning after pills, of birth control pills, and of just saying NO! .........why is an unwanted pregnancy even an issue today? With all of those options, a Supreme Court intervention should not be needed!
Unfortunately, Mister GMC, birth control pills are not 100% effective, condoms rip, and rape does not permit a "NO". There are pregnancies that will take the mother's life, and pregnancies in which the fetus will never be a viable human being. In the real world, a need for safe abortion upon demand will continue to exist.
13
I'm way past childbearing age, yet cried with relief when I read this news. I lived in NYC in the 1960s, when many of my friends had illegal abortions. In those days, if you had the money, you got a doctor in Puerto Rico to do it and you spent the weekend on the beach, all for $300. But there were plenty of others who would induce labor for you and then you went back to your apartment and would suffer for hours and then finally it was finished up in the toilet. How dreadfully cruel that lawmakers in Texas would try to bring this all back.
15
And another major loss for the aborted fetus. 50,000,000 abortions later you still don't get it.
Roe-Wade was a biologically faulted decision, enabled by Justice Blackmun who clearly failed his HS biology course. A human fetus can only be human, unless someone can show us precisely when it is or isn't. Sentient doesn't make you human, either....unless we pull the plug on those in a coma.
Roe-Wade should be overturned. If a woman is pregnant and doesn't want her child, the government and private funding sources should provide her with whatever resources are needed to bring her baby fullterm and delivered.
That makes far more sense than 50,000,000+ executions of human-kind.
Roe-Wade was a biologically faulted decision, enabled by Justice Blackmun who clearly failed his HS biology course. A human fetus can only be human, unless someone can show us precisely when it is or isn't. Sentient doesn't make you human, either....unless we pull the plug on those in a coma.
Roe-Wade should be overturned. If a woman is pregnant and doesn't want her child, the government and private funding sources should provide her with whatever resources are needed to bring her baby fullterm and delivered.
That makes far more sense than 50,000,000+ executions of human-kind.
2
The point is that a "human fetus" is still a fetus and not a live human baby.
My high school biology course - which I passed -- did not say otherwise.
My high school biology course - which I passed -- did not say otherwise.
3
Ironic that the Right has been using regulation-type laws to limit access to abortion. It further goes to show the desperation of the anti-abortion movement in this country.
Dismember that congress has shirked it's duty to fill the court with another justice.
The ridiculousness of the Rightwing never ceases to amaze, yet as with Brexit, they are popular with enough of the flyover ignorant churchies to win elections.
Dismember that congress has shirked it's duty to fill the court with another justice.
The ridiculousness of the Rightwing never ceases to amaze, yet as with Brexit, they are popular with enough of the flyover ignorant churchies to win elections.
6
I wonder how long, and how many times over and over, women will have to fight to control their reproductive functions, and wrest that control from men whose dominance is threatened when women aren't stuck home "barefoot and pregnant."
8
Do not start popping the champagne cork just yet. The pro abortion folks may have had a victory but the battle for the right to live is not over. I watched pro life groups discussing the latest Supreme Court case and they were not discouraged. They said that this will not deter them and they will continue their fight to protect the unborn. More young people are in the pro life movement than ever before and they have energy and grit on their side. I know they will succeed in this extremely important endeavor and they will not give up. Saving innocent life is much to important to stop now. They are determined and they will win.
2
It is nobody's business to decide what woman want to do with their reproductive organs, except women themselves, not men and even less the courts. This is a victory of freedom from Religions and for Reason.
7
The problem is that the fetus is not a "reproductive organ". I support contraception and day after pills, but the six months of "right to choose" with no questions asked, makes me want to throw up.
But that IS the current law.
And note that in the US a married woman not only does not have to consult her husband, she does not even need to inform him. He could remain childless for years and have no idea why. But if there IS a child, he will responsible for child support and sent to prison if he does not pay up.
Feminists have won their victories, at the cost of everyone else's rights.
But that IS the current law.
And note that in the US a married woman not only does not have to consult her husband, she does not even need to inform him. He could remain childless for years and have no idea why. But if there IS a child, he will responsible for child support and sent to prison if he does not pay up.
Feminists have won their victories, at the cost of everyone else's rights.
2
In this editorial and the related articles in today's paper, all the quoted politicians looking to restrict or ban abortion are attributed to men. Go figure.
8
I think the majority of us here in Comments are old enough to understand what I mean when I say, "I know I sound like a broken record, but..." (It's really too bad MP3's --or whatever else currently delivers music to eardrums-- aren't afflicted with pops, clicks, sudden jumps to another verse or the skip-repeat, skip-repeat, skip-repeat of the old 45's and LP's). But here goes...
The reason abortion is before the court at all has nothing to do with women's health and safety. If that were the case, every medical procedure in the ICD-9 or 10 or whatever the number of the current medical procedure guide, regardless of whether said procedure is gender-specific or not, would have its own explicitly detailed prohibitions and restrictions. No, abortion is front and center for two reasons: religion and control of women. Which, of course is really only one reason: religion.
The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. Period. You are free to practice it or to not practice it. Period. You are not free to practice it on another person or to force it down another's throat without that person's express consent. Period.
And as for the question of how religion ever adopted abortion as its favorite way to control women, the bible is not the place to look for an answer. It is silent on the issue.
Of the 5000+ words in the Constitution, about 50 deal with religion and its place in government. Of the million+ words in the bible, not a one deals with abortion.
Go figure.
The reason abortion is before the court at all has nothing to do with women's health and safety. If that were the case, every medical procedure in the ICD-9 or 10 or whatever the number of the current medical procedure guide, regardless of whether said procedure is gender-specific or not, would have its own explicitly detailed prohibitions and restrictions. No, abortion is front and center for two reasons: religion and control of women. Which, of course is really only one reason: religion.
The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. Period. You are free to practice it or to not practice it. Period. You are not free to practice it on another person or to force it down another's throat without that person's express consent. Period.
And as for the question of how religion ever adopted abortion as its favorite way to control women, the bible is not the place to look for an answer. It is silent on the issue.
Of the 5000+ words in the Constitution, about 50 deal with religion and its place in government. Of the million+ words in the bible, not a one deals with abortion.
Go figure.
65
"...regulations that have the purpose or effect of presenting a substantial obstacle..."
So let me see if I've got this:
Abortion, which you *do not* have a *Constitutional right* to and which is 100% guaranteed to end in the death of a 100% innocent human should *not* be regulated such that this medical procedure can be allowed to have sub-standard medical conditions in which to perform it.
Versus your natural right to self-protection, which you *do* have a *Constitutional right* to in the 2nd Amendment, and which is NOT guaranteed to end in the death of ANYONE but MAY WELL SAVE the life of an innocent human needs to be regulated beyond reach of many Americans...
Ok.
Got it.
So let me see if I've got this:
Abortion, which you *do not* have a *Constitutional right* to and which is 100% guaranteed to end in the death of a 100% innocent human should *not* be regulated such that this medical procedure can be allowed to have sub-standard medical conditions in which to perform it.
Versus your natural right to self-protection, which you *do* have a *Constitutional right* to in the 2nd Amendment, and which is NOT guaranteed to end in the death of ANYONE but MAY WELL SAVE the life of an innocent human needs to be regulated beyond reach of many Americans...
Ok.
Got it.
1
Let's take this a step further:
Forcing another to become a parent should be a felony.
Forcing another to become a parent should be a felony.
9
2016: sex ed, more contraception than ever in history, the morning-after pill, yet people still cannot take personal responsibility for an unwanted pregnancy. Fine; along comes the American taxpayer: no worry we will pay for it and everything else.
1
It has been obvious from the outset that Republican-driven restrictions on abortion access in no way were motivated by medical concerns for the welfare of the woman. These proliferating and unnecessary restrictions were always designed to undermine and eventually nullify Roe v. Wade. Any judge at any level who professed blindness to that is simply dishonest and morally reprehensible. Yes, I mean Thomas, Roberts, and Alito. And any other judge who "decided" that way at the district and circuit court level.
It is precisely the same when conservative judges uphold Republican vote suppression efforts in state after state. Only an ideologically driven and dishonest judge can support such underhanded, fundamentally anti-constitutional, and obviously immoral manipulation of our political system.
At some point one has to say that some things can not be justified as merely "differences of opinion" or "judicial philosophy." At some point the clarity of fact must triumph.
It is precisely the same when conservative judges uphold Republican vote suppression efforts in state after state. Only an ideologically driven and dishonest judge can support such underhanded, fundamentally anti-constitutional, and obviously immoral manipulation of our political system.
At some point one has to say that some things can not be justified as merely "differences of opinion" or "judicial philosophy." At some point the clarity of fact must triumph.
11
I commend Justice Kennedy, who is anti-abortion, for doing his job honorably. The other side of the coin is that Roberts, Thomas and Alito are not fit to be wearing their robes; a Justice is supposed to dispense justice.
13
The main reason I am pro-choice is the fact that these anti-choice laws affect only the poor and lower middle class. I'm old enough to remember when middle and upper women could have "something like abortion but not really abortion but had the same effect as abortion" done in their doctor's offices. Or could take a quick trip to another country or state. The enforcement of a law should not depend on a citizen's wallet.
12
Thank God. Thank God for common sense.
8
The right to have an abortion will always be controversial. Unlike most civil rights issues, abortion is believed my many to involve the rights of two people, the mother and the developing child.
1
During all the debate and discussion of a women's rights to choose what she does with her own body, I never hear or read any discussion on the responsibilities of the other half of the equation. My gut feeling is that if men were legally required to provide financial support for the unwanted pregnancy and child they helped create, there would soon be no more discussion on this topic. And it would most likely be fully funded by the states.
7
Killing babies wins again as left's supreme court judges back their parties side, as always, regardless of the fact the it provides less protection for woman. With the help of Judge Kennedy, and I use the term judge loosely they have shown that the supreme court has lost it purpose which is interpret the law and not just act has political hacks, which is what they are.
2
I'm elated at this decision, keep working out, Ruthie! Alito's dissent would not be accepted in a grade school class--doctors retiring all at once? Please. Thomas joining Alito I understand, but the Chief Justice? This makes selecting new justices more important than ever!
11
Republicans protect the Constitutional rights of persons on the Terrorist watch list to buy automatic weapons but want to deny women their Constitutional right to choose.
It's not the Constitution they hold scared it's their ideology. Obviously.
It's not the Constitution they hold scared it's their ideology. Obviously.
10
Our understaffed Supreme Court struck down Texas's punitive and dishonest abortion law yesterday. It was the biggest victory for women's rights since 1992. Apparently though, we must keep re-litigating the same battles over and over again in order to hang on to our victories. Roe V. Wade was decided in 1973. I was then 15 years old. The war has waged on unabated ever since and I doubt it will be resolved in my lifetime. Just one of many fronts on which conservative forces seem to be waging a never ending siege. It's always one step forward two steps back with the forces of "free-dumb". But yesterday was definitely another big step forward for women and progressives. Yesterday we won.
50
Just change a couple of words in this article, and it become obvious how hypocritical the NYT editors are in their selective defense of constitutional rights. For example: "The justices’ reasoning in overturning the law applies to hundreds of other attempts in recent years by Democrat lawmakers around the country to restrict or destroy the constitutionally protected right to bear arms."
1
Did you read the part about "well regulated" ?
4
Did you read the part about "the people"? And did you read anything about a "right to abortion"? Didn't think so.
1
Abortion is so common that every family in America has had one or more. Even court members, congress and every State official have been closely associated personally, or family-wise. Over fifty million women have had an abortion (on demand) and toss in their sexual counterpart and that's a hundred million people. Count the mother and father of the on demand crowd and that adds up to 400,000,000 people involved in on demand abortion. Abortion is as common and ordinary as passing the collection plate in church or watching reality TV or buying a shotgun. I'll bet a dime that the three justices that voted against this ruling all have a mother, sister, girlfriend or female cousin that had an on demand abortion and they very likely know about it and are simple hypocrites regarding this universal, mathematical fact.
3
The the SC rewrites the TX law, and we are supposed to celebrate? The law made it certain that Gosnell-type death chambers don't happen anymore.
So now killing babies is still guaranteed, and the health of the mother in these death chambers is irelevant. Great job, SCOTUS.
So now killing babies is still guaranteed, and the health of the mother in these death chambers is irelevant. Great job, SCOTUS.
3
Abortion entails the suppression of human life. Although some world views regard it as justifiable under specific circumstances, even such views should be regard abortion as a "lesser evil", not as a good. Therefore, I propose that news reporting about matter of abortion eschew terms such as "victory" from its language.
2
What I find to be the height of hypocrisy are those permanent, professionally printed signs outside Catholic churches and fundamentalist churches that say: "Pregnant? Scared? We can help. Call XXXX."
Those churches should have signs that announce free sex education classes in the church basement once a week at a certain time; or once-a-month clinics where nurse practitioners are available to answer any questions, write prescriptions for birth control, etc.
Those infuriating "Can we help?" signs are only admitting what everyone knows -- that "abstinence only" sex education is totally ineffective.
Those signs, which funnel scared girls and women to "pro-life" organizations that do not respect reproductive freedom, are a good argument for taking away or curtailing churches' tax-exempt status.
Those churches should have signs that announce free sex education classes in the church basement once a week at a certain time; or once-a-month clinics where nurse practitioners are available to answer any questions, write prescriptions for birth control, etc.
Those infuriating "Can we help?" signs are only admitting what everyone knows -- that "abstinence only" sex education is totally ineffective.
Those signs, which funnel scared girls and women to "pro-life" organizations that do not respect reproductive freedom, are a good argument for taking away or curtailing churches' tax-exempt status.
50
scrim1: it is unclear to me why you feel threatened by private organizations giving support to pregnant women outside of offering them abortions, and I don't understand the thread of your reasoning leading to the conclusion that those that do should lose tax-exempt status. Is it "pro-choice" only when the choice made agrees with the one you would have made?
1
A woman's right to choose: that is the guiding principle. So glad a majority in the Court put the boot to those in Texas who spout gibberish in defense of their attack on the right to an abortion. As for Alito.....meh!
2
Amid the horrors of the current POTUS campaigns and the parallel horror of Brexit--the lies and distortions--we have two things to hold on to: the advances in LGBT rights and the confirmation of a woman's right to choose. I suppose there's a lesson there for HRC.
7
Your post is illuminating. You abhor messy democracy and any attempt by a people to rule themselves, free of unelected international bureaucrats and foreign domination.. At the same time you cling to and glorify sodomy and abortion. What lesson should the establishment candidate HRC learn?
2
Willie: Clearly you don't like the word "rights." I wonder why. You approve of lies and distortions, and you haven't clue #1 about the peoples of the UK and why some reject rule by English oligarchs.
5
Had ti denigrate me didn't you because you have no real arguments. Sad and pathetic.
1
There would be no need for abortions if we started speaking honestly to our children about simple biology (boys too). Shouldn't the dad have to experience the humiliation with the mom?
I would love nothing better than to shelter my daughter but parenthood doesn't work that way. I'm not getting her ready to be a giant baby, I'm getting her ready to be an adult. And that requires honesty about things that make us as parents cringe. I don't want any man ever to go near her but that is la la land.
The only thing I can do is teach her about protecting herself and that is body and mind.
If men could get pregnant, abortion clinics would be on every corner.
I would love nothing better than to shelter my daughter but parenthood doesn't work that way. I'm not getting her ready to be a giant baby, I'm getting her ready to be an adult. And that requires honesty about things that make us as parents cringe. I don't want any man ever to go near her but that is la la land.
The only thing I can do is teach her about protecting herself and that is body and mind.
If men could get pregnant, abortion clinics would be on every corner.
13
I have to take issue with a few of your comments, Lynne.
* There will always be a need for abortion. Birth control methods fail. Sexual assault happens. Women's medical status and life circumstances change drastically. Relationships fall apart, or are toxic to begin with. Alcohol and drugs cloud judgment. Wanted fetuses develop tragic conditions. All of these circumstances and more are why abortion needs to remain legal, and a woman's choice.
* Also, in an ideal world where abortion is legal and treated like the medical procedure it is, and clinics aren't haunted by protesters, "humiliation" would not be an issue. If society would mind its own business, women would be free to make--or not make--this decision in consultation with their doctor, their clergy if desired, and their own conscience and self-determination. It's a hard enough choice to confront without other people declaring it shameful--which it isn't.
* There will always be a need for abortion. Birth control methods fail. Sexual assault happens. Women's medical status and life circumstances change drastically. Relationships fall apart, or are toxic to begin with. Alcohol and drugs cloud judgment. Wanted fetuses develop tragic conditions. All of these circumstances and more are why abortion needs to remain legal, and a woman's choice.
* Also, in an ideal world where abortion is legal and treated like the medical procedure it is, and clinics aren't haunted by protesters, "humiliation" would not be an issue. If society would mind its own business, women would be free to make--or not make--this decision in consultation with their doctor, their clergy if desired, and their own conscience and self-determination. It's a hard enough choice to confront without other people declaring it shameful--which it isn't.
6
There is a deeply seated, evil, Taliban-like quality to the Texas political class that enacted this law in the first place. It was obviously an end run around the Constitution of the US to control peoples' choices, they knew it, and they reveled in it. Texas is a wonderful state, but it's politicians are leading it off a cliff.
16
Religion is just another tool to wreck the United States.
5
Finally some sanity in a turbulent time. Not only was the Supreme Court's ruling correct and consistent with its previous ruling but the dissenting opinion offered by Justices Roberts, Alito and Thomas was shameful, amateurish and founded in utter ignorance of what Texas and other Republican controlled states have done to women.
This ruling is about so much more than just abortion; it's about women's basic human right to access health care, receive counseling, treatment and to be able to make medically informed decisions about their bodies.
Isn't it ironic and telling that all three dissenting Justices are men!
This ruling is about so much more than just abortion; it's about women's basic human right to access health care, receive counseling, treatment and to be able to make medically informed decisions about their bodies.
Isn't it ironic and telling that all three dissenting Justices are men!
67
You can be sure it's not done in ignorance of what the GOP-run states are up to... these justices are fully on board with the program. That's why they were appointed, and that's why the GOP is shamelessly refusing to consider Obama's appointment of a truly thoughtful S.Ct. justice.
6
I'm not sure how the Texas AG made the case that the law was to protect women's health with a straight face. This is the state that doesn't want to impose "onerous" regulations on the petrochemical companies and so has disastrous explosions that kill multiple people every few years (they hold the record for the most people killed in an industrial explosion with the Texas City explosion). Yet they say this law is to protect women from a harm they can't even show exists.
86
Philip Good point.
2
I agree with others here that it wasn't the Supreme Court that made this decision, it was five members of the eight member panel that is the current Supreme Court. Let's examine the dissents and the chief justice's logic that, in this case, starts to sound like the lies of little boys caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Alito, in particular, uses a kind of logic that doesn't exist in the philosophy books. Solomon he ain't!
13
When Republicans are in power, rights are usually reserved for predictable groups: evangelicals, white males, corporations, the NRA. Everyone else be damned. I have no idea why Americans have not really ben able to accept that fact.
12
".....Rick Perry, in pushing for the law, said it was one step toward an 'ideal world'...."
That's an important point. The conservative mind visualizes an "ideal World", one in which their narrow-minded concepts of morality and order are enforced upon everyone else.
That's an important point. The conservative mind visualizes an "ideal World", one in which their narrow-minded concepts of morality and order are enforced upon everyone else.
21
One large hole blown in the Republican fraud, deceit, and abuse machine. So many more to tear down. Next.
15
I find it sad and disappointing that so many basic , common sense items that most advanced democratic societies long ago and without fuss accepted and integrated into their society with little fuss or controversy let alone angst between the various political parties chosen by their people.
That America is increasingly relying on an ideologically split group of 9 appointed Judges whose position is unimpeachable and for life on major issues that in some cases could adversely affect the lives and well being of many millions, is troubling to say the least.
This issue is becoming more critical as time goes by and indicates a Society at odds with itself and various vested interests attempting to have the will of the State subverted to their own particular agenda, based on their particular reasons and often at odds with the view of the Majority of people.
Mandate by 9 ideologically split non elected people on a Nation's behavior ,actions and decisions is fundamentally the antithesis of a Democracy and the wishes and inclusion of all its people in its direction and course and ultimately its very existence.
The more such a body is relied upon, the greater the risks and potential damage that could be done to the well being and lives of so many.
Which is to high a gamble to take even when many decisions made are to the benefit of many and for the greater good.
No Country should risk its direction or policies to such a select, elite biased group and it is telling that America does.
That America is increasingly relying on an ideologically split group of 9 appointed Judges whose position is unimpeachable and for life on major issues that in some cases could adversely affect the lives and well being of many millions, is troubling to say the least.
This issue is becoming more critical as time goes by and indicates a Society at odds with itself and various vested interests attempting to have the will of the State subverted to their own particular agenda, based on their particular reasons and often at odds with the view of the Majority of people.
Mandate by 9 ideologically split non elected people on a Nation's behavior ,actions and decisions is fundamentally the antithesis of a Democracy and the wishes and inclusion of all its people in its direction and course and ultimately its very existence.
The more such a body is relied upon, the greater the risks and potential damage that could be done to the well being and lives of so many.
Which is to high a gamble to take even when many decisions made are to the benefit of many and for the greater good.
No Country should risk its direction or policies to such a select, elite biased group and it is telling that America does.
3
The biggest danger to this nation is legislators who don't adhere to the limitations of their delegated powers.
2
The graphic that accompanied this article was heart-breaking in the way go pain-filled joy and joy-filled pain. Why do we have to break through merely yo own our bodies? But today, we broke through. We broke through.
4
No one on either side ever thought that the Texas regulations were enacted to protect women's health. The question was always: are there enough judges hearing the case in the SCOTUS who would trade judicial integrity for outright mendacity. Turns out there were only 3 with a fourth there in spirit.
9
Republicans are especially phoney on this issue and continue to claim their anti abortion laws are only to protect women's health. Three Supreme Court justices went along with this wink and nod outright lie. Their vote on the court is absolute proof that they are dishonest and shouldn't be in the important positions they hold.
10
This has nothing to do with "women's health".
What is all about is a group of sick people trying to impose their delusional and ignorant religious beliefs on the rest of us.
It is time the Republican Party was flushed down the toilet for good.
They have done absolutely nothing to support the wishes of the majority of citizens of this country for decades and have done nothing but obstruct positive change.
What is all about is a group of sick people trying to impose their delusional and ignorant religious beliefs on the rest of us.
It is time the Republican Party was flushed down the toilet for good.
They have done absolutely nothing to support the wishes of the majority of citizens of this country for decades and have done nothing but obstruct positive change.
14
Much appreciation goes to the Women's Bar for weighing in so strongly with excellent legal arguments. Thank you, my sisters. And to the courageous women who publically bared their own private decisions to assist these arguments, I salute you. You have helped so many!
10
Don't expect the Womb Nazis to just give up and go home. There's still the 5th Circuit to deliver gibberish and ideology. There are still RepugniCon legislatures aplenty willing to challenge abortion until Teleprompter Trump appoints a new batch of Taliban Christians to the Federal Bench.
Myriad Governors ready to force untruths into the mouths of doctors. And deep wells of tax payer money to cover the legal costs.
Yet today's opinion (still MON) in the final timezone. Still celebrating and reading the opinions.
Myriad Governors ready to force untruths into the mouths of doctors. And deep wells of tax payer money to cover the legal costs.
Yet today's opinion (still MON) in the final timezone. Still celebrating and reading the opinions.
7
Another decision announced Monday could have almost an equal impact on the safety of all Americans, including women. The court allowed states to restrict access to guns by those convicted of domestic violence. Imagine if the Orlando shooter had been convicted of domestic violence against his first wife, and a national restriction were in place that recognized the danger such abusers represent when they have access to guns. Those who truly hold life sacred should get behind this and insist that the US Congress take up the challenge.
9
"Among the safest medical procedures"
you quote in your Editorial.
Perhaps, but the most certain of killing a babe in their mothers womb.
you quote in your Editorial.
Perhaps, but the most certain of killing a babe in their mothers womb.
2
There is no killing of a baby. And if you people really cared about babies, you would be funding prenatal care, and early childhood education. This is about controlling women.
69
John
How naive, "babes" need to be born into a family, perhaps a Mother and Father, to love, shelter and provide for this children. If children have these necessities, they can grow into happy, healthy citizens.
How naive, "babes" need to be born into a family, perhaps a Mother and Father, to love, shelter and provide for this children. If children have these necessities, they can grow into happy, healthy citizens.
5
The human soul develops from the experience of living. You are projecting yourself onto an entity that has not yet developed a soul.
9
It's probably off base to make a comment about phraseology in an editorial on such a momentous subject. But here goes anyway. I often see the phrase "a textbook definition: of something or other. in this case "of what the court had prohibited..." To me, the Texas law was not a textbook definition of anything. A definition is a succinct explication of a word or concept such as "legislative overreach" The Texas law is rather a "textbook example" of what the court had prohibited.
3
The dismissive treatment of women by America's religious right over the abortion issue is just one of many ways in which right-wing, Born Again, true believing zealots (eager for The Rapture) have a strong common bond with Islamofascist fanatics. I must say, as a Catholic myself, that I think abortion is in many cases ethically and morally wrong; but like all moral issues it is the province of God, a matter of conscience that a woman must in this case decide for herself with perhaps some pastoral counseling, and neither my business nor the state's. I applaud Justice Kennedy, another Catholic and typically the most moderate and reasonable of men, for his views in this matter. And hooray for the liberal Jews on the court. I think we have enough members of my faith, all of whom seem to have been picked for their rigidity and ideological fervor.
8
I had an abortion in Texas as a college student in 98. Never regretted it. Not one day.
Nice to see the SC dragging my beloved (but sometimes stupid and cruel) homestate into the modern world.
I remind those who feel passionately pro life to continue their activism towards less abortion: better wages, better health care, equal pay, family leave. Those are the real right to life issues for families and kids.
Nice to see the SC dragging my beloved (but sometimes stupid and cruel) homestate into the modern world.
I remind those who feel passionately pro life to continue their activism towards less abortion: better wages, better health care, equal pay, family leave. Those are the real right to life issues for families and kids.
17
Since the Texas legislature denies healthcare to millions of its people, they have forfeited their right to make any claims that they care about the health of pregnant women.
The pendulum that started to swing in the wrong direction when Reagan was elected appears to now finally be starting to swing the other way. Frankly I would have thought this would have occurred somewhere around the end of Bush 43's disastrous first term, where he was on mission from god. Had enough of the electorate come to the realization that Bush had no special 'channel' to god (whatever that is), and thus voted him out of office, there never would have been an Alito and Roberts on the SCOTUS. Its called blowback people! It seems likely (god i hope so) that Hillary will be the next president. Finally the dark ages will come an end.
The pendulum that started to swing in the wrong direction when Reagan was elected appears to now finally be starting to swing the other way. Frankly I would have thought this would have occurred somewhere around the end of Bush 43's disastrous first term, where he was on mission from god. Had enough of the electorate come to the realization that Bush had no special 'channel' to god (whatever that is), and thus voted him out of office, there never would have been an Alito and Roberts on the SCOTUS. Its called blowback people! It seems likely (god i hope so) that Hillary will be the next president. Finally the dark ages will come an end.
12
A tax on religion is long overdue.
16
Removal of all direct and indirect subsidies to religion, and all faith-based legislation from lawbooks, should suffice.
2
Difficult to understand how three intelligent, open minded individuals could rule to uphold the law. Is it a State's rights issue for them or do they buy the specious notion that this law somehow makes abortions safer?
2
Their own reasoning impugns the assertion that they are intelligent and open-minded.
3
The mystifying part of this is that Alito and Thomas can't do basic math or grasp simple concepts. To compare admitting privileges to the level of Physician attrition or the withdrawal of funds is no argument at all and just a waste of the courts time. I thought we were paying these two to think? Now that the dust has settled from the undue burden of Scalia's snide remarks disguised as intellect, and have only the mundane nonsense of Alito's and Thomas' thinly veiled attempts at christian sharia we see the error of their ways more clearly.
Burdens and benefits do not exist in their own separate vacuums they exist together. This is a basic philosophical and logical truth above any legal argument.
To say that deference should be to the state legislature in this case, as Thomas asserted, is the same as telling the abortion seeker to go build her own ambulatory surgical center so she may obtain a benefit she already has and has the right too. No undue burden there! If the state is so concerned about the health of the abortion seeker then they should fulfill their own requirements by providing the infrastructure necassary to meet those concerns without imposing any burden.
Alito argued that states were enacting these laws "in the wake of the Kermit Gosnell scandal". This is to say that they are simply trying to protect lives not impose a burden. Alito's hypocrisy is appalling. This is all about shoving someones religious beliefs down our throats. Stop christian sharia now!!
Burdens and benefits do not exist in their own separate vacuums they exist together. This is a basic philosophical and logical truth above any legal argument.
To say that deference should be to the state legislature in this case, as Thomas asserted, is the same as telling the abortion seeker to go build her own ambulatory surgical center so she may obtain a benefit she already has and has the right too. No undue burden there! If the state is so concerned about the health of the abortion seeker then they should fulfill their own requirements by providing the infrastructure necassary to meet those concerns without imposing any burden.
Alito argued that states were enacting these laws "in the wake of the Kermit Gosnell scandal". This is to say that they are simply trying to protect lives not impose a burden. Alito's hypocrisy is appalling. This is all about shoving someones religious beliefs down our throats. Stop christian sharia now!!
12
Although I am very pleased with the Court's decision and it's impact on women's rights and constitutional guarantees, I am even more elated in the triumph of right over wrong. The Texas operational premise was a lie from the outset and this particular lie is only one of many that can be attributed to the Republican controlled Legislature in a state that was once great. The state I used to be so proud of has lost its way and has deteriorated into an embarrassing, maniacal conglomeration of religious intolerance, racism and gun worship. In the past Texas was a live and let live kind of place that encouraged rugged individualism and free thinking. Unfortunately, the legacies of Bush, Perry and now Abbott have instilled a "my way or the highway" mentality that is crippling the state and its citizens. Really, what kind of outright meanness and sheer ugliness would prompt Texas Republicans to refuse to expand Medicaid or try to subjugate their own mothers, sisters, daughters, wives and life partners?
So thank you SCOTUS. This was a needed victory, but we're going to need many, many more if we value op
So thank you SCOTUS. This was a needed victory, but we're going to need many, many more if we value op
80
It is grotesque that these rinky dink lawyers Alito, Roberts and Thomas launched an assault on women's first amendment rights to abort a fetus based on her own religious beliefs under false pretences.
It was a bogus law not based on bogus assertions on medical safety it was not based on science. The only purpose of the law that was stricken down was to create obstacles in getting an abortion not any benefit for women's health.
It is a disgrace that Alito, Roberts and Thomas went along with this charade.
It was a bogus law not based on bogus assertions on medical safety it was not based on science. The only purpose of the law that was stricken down was to create obstacles in getting an abortion not any benefit for women's health.
It is a disgrace that Alito, Roberts and Thomas went along with this charade.
10
It amazes me that the crazed anti-choice contingent has been able over the past 40+ years to slowly roll back all of the protections guaranteed by Roe v. Wade, thereby denying safe abortions to poor women, and traumatizing women who are lucky enough to have access to abortion clinics. They have been allowed to accomplish this mission through the votes of five white Catholic males on SCOTUS. If there is justice in this world, Hillary Clinton will be our next president, the Senate will swing to the Democrats, and the next SCOTUS appointee will be a solid vote to defeat any and all infringements on women's rights.
7
Okay, I get Alito and Thomas, they would twist themselves into a legal pretzel if it meant denying a right that offends their religious and political sensibilities, I don't understand Roberts.
It's his court and legacy.
This law was a thinly veiled attempt to deny the women of Texas reproductive health care. Shame on him.
It's his court and legacy.
This law was a thinly veiled attempt to deny the women of Texas reproductive health care. Shame on him.
9
I can't figure out what is more disgusting, the disingenuousness the forced-birthers are employing in pretending to care about women's health, or the fact that they think people are too stupid to see through their charade.
10
It strikes me as strange that Chief Justice Roberts, who twice went out of his way to ensure that the Affordable Care Act remained the law of the land, would dissent in the Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt case. Just as we were beginning to get encouraged that Justice Roberts was no longer a reliable litmus vote, à la the late Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas and Justice Alito, against “health as a right” issues (a woman’s right to choose being one of them), he let women down.
It seems to me that there is a religious reckoning here for Justice Roberts, who is Catholic and might be letting his pro-life sensibilities override the “affordable care” needs of women?
It seems to me that there is a religious reckoning here for Justice Roberts, who is Catholic and might be letting his pro-life sensibilities override the “affordable care” needs of women?
3
I often wonder how a pregnancy-enforcing man would feel about abortion if a fertilized egg could be implanted within him and--that very day--he would be stripped of decision-making about his body.
Only that fertilized egg would matter to millions of people. They would gaze lovingly at images of it and ignore the man himself--who he is, who he loves, his hopes and plans, his desperate needs, all of which conflict with other people's plans for that fertilized egg and the power they yearn to gain by enforcing their will on him.
Only that fertilized egg would matter to millions of people. They would gaze lovingly at images of it and ignore the man himself--who he is, who he loves, his hopes and plans, his desperate needs, all of which conflict with other people's plans for that fertilized egg and the power they yearn to gain by enforcing their will on him.
7
I have no issue with all those who do not believe in abortion, just don't stop those of us who do.
The right to decide whether to have an abortion or not belongs to women. Nor should they have to provide reasons for their decisions. Legislating laws to make it more difficult to obtain an abortion is a cruel punishment for an already difficult decision.
I applaud the Supreme Court fort their decision in this case. It was the correct decision for an unjust law.
The right to decide whether to have an abortion or not belongs to women. Nor should they have to provide reasons for their decisions. Legislating laws to make it more difficult to obtain an abortion is a cruel punishment for an already difficult decision.
I applaud the Supreme Court fort their decision in this case. It was the correct decision for an unjust law.
72
Absolutely thrilled with this very appropriate and solid decision, based on both precedent and logic. Especially thrilled since we California ladies were all set to provide bus fare to our sadly oppressed counterparts in Texas. Where the same raging "right to lifers" can't see their way to restricting the sale of weapons whose sole object (wrenchingly realized recently in Orlando) is to commit genocide at eight rounds per second. Buy enough groceries and they'll throw in a handgun. But try to rid yourself of an unwanted fetus and there's both a significant wait and perhaps an entire border to cross. There are people in this county whose sheer hypocrisy and mind numbing lack of sense in service to a blind and fundamentalist agenda is staggering. This decision thankfully brings us one step closer (or should I say back) to the tenets of Roe and Planned Parenthood. That you SCOTUS for validating our reproductive freedom and keeping the barbarians at bay.
4
More unborn children who pay the ultimate price for "adults" exercising their creatively implied "constitutional" right to abandon their responsibilities.
Yay!
Yay!
Once again, this whole issue is blatant racism. Upper middle class and wealthy women can just go to a physician near where they are, and their health insurance might cover it. Even if it did not, in most cases, it only takes a pill to accomplish, and the woman can go back to their physician afterward.
The women who are truly impacted by this Texas Law, and with versions thereof in other states, are the poor, with limited financial resources. These women are often not cared for by many private physicians.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
The women who are truly impacted by this Texas Law, and with versions thereof in other states, are the poor, with limited financial resources. These women are often not cared for by many private physicians.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
3
It was such an interesting gimmick that the anti-abortionistic politicians came up with, requring tough requirements for abortion facilities and doctors under the pretence of women's health. I wonder who thought up the scheme. And I wonder what will be the next novel and dishonest gimmick they will come up with. Or maybe there aren't any others, and they will have to try a more direct tactic, such as defunding. But I think any approach that results in closure of abortion facilities will not be accepted by the Supreme Court.
1
This decision should be understood to stand for the principle thatI legislation designed to impose the religious beliefs of one group on others will fail as unconstitutional.
Those who would like to pass such legislation should ask themselves whether they would be satisfied to have the tenets of another religion imposed on them by legislation. (Sharia law anybody?) If the answer is "NO" then they need to stop trying to do what they would find offensive if done by others to them.
This is not rocket science.
Those who would like to pass such legislation should ask themselves whether they would be satisfied to have the tenets of another religion imposed on them by legislation. (Sharia law anybody?) If the answer is "NO" then they need to stop trying to do what they would find offensive if done by others to them.
This is not rocket science.
6
Abortion is a woman's very personal choice, but our government should not pay for or subsidize it.
The government does not subsidize it in any way. Another myth created by the forced birther movement.
7
"...Justice Samuel Alito Jr. In a lengthy dissent, Justice Alito, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justice Clarence Thomas, offered unconvincing explanations for clinic closures. Perhaps, he postulated, older doctors in those clinics had decided to retire — on the very same day."
Is this serious? I am in shock. After hearing about today's ruling, since the truth of this case was so clear, I was wondering how Roberts, Alito and Thomas would explain their dissent. I never thought it would be anything quite as pathetic, and quite frankly, as scary as that. The Constitution, the law, and justice means nothing to these men.
Is this serious? I am in shock. After hearing about today's ruling, since the truth of this case was so clear, I was wondering how Roberts, Alito and Thomas would explain their dissent. I never thought it would be anything quite as pathetic, and quite frankly, as scary as that. The Constitution, the law, and justice means nothing to these men.
6
I agree that as long as abortion is legal the restrictions Texas put on doctors were way over the top. Not that existing regulations don't need to be tightened up, they do. The Kermit Gosnell situation is a gory example of what can happen when oversite of a clinic is lacking.
The thing I am trying to wrap my head around is the outright glee being displayed by radical feminists, leftists and far left media outlets like MSNBC, Mother Jones and the NYT at the prospect of many more abortions bing preformed. I know many pro-choice men and wonen, yet none of them think abortion is a good thing. It is in fact a brutal concept and process, but in some cases a necessary procedure that should be available to a woman in need.
I am reminded of my Rush Limbaugh listening days. He would say the goal of radical feminists was to have as many abortions performed as possible. I just figured he was being outrageous and trying to tweek liberals as was his wont. But based on the unmitigated joy and delerium I am seeing from the far left over this decision, maybe Limbaugh had a point.
The thing I am trying to wrap my head around is the outright glee being displayed by radical feminists, leftists and far left media outlets like MSNBC, Mother Jones and the NYT at the prospect of many more abortions bing preformed. I know many pro-choice men and wonen, yet none of them think abortion is a good thing. It is in fact a brutal concept and process, but in some cases a necessary procedure that should be available to a woman in need.
I am reminded of my Rush Limbaugh listening days. He would say the goal of radical feminists was to have as many abortions performed as possible. I just figured he was being outrageous and trying to tweek liberals as was his wont. But based on the unmitigated joy and delerium I am seeing from the far left over this decision, maybe Limbaugh had a point.
13
Larry Gr The point you are missing is that if you do not believe in or want an abortion, don't have one,
Otherwise, it is none of your or Rush Limbaugh's business.
Otherwise, it is none of your or Rush Limbaugh's business.
9
"I just figured he was being outrageous and trying to tweek liberals as was his wont." As usual for a conservative, you are projecting your ways onto your enemies, when in fact you have no understanding of them at all. People are elated because a huge injustice has finally been addressed, and a fundamental right reestablished after decades of conservative oppression.
13
No one on the left side is shouting with glee and wanting more abortions. Period.
Woman want their legally allowed choice. Done.
Quoting Rush is another example of a man who does not respect women either let alone their right to choose.
You want fewer abortions? Support health insurance covering birth control completely and men need to ALWAYS use condoms.
Woman want their legally allowed choice. Done.
Quoting Rush is another example of a man who does not respect women either let alone their right to choose.
You want fewer abortions? Support health insurance covering birth control completely and men need to ALWAYS use condoms.
12
My opinion? The Supreme Court should refuse to hear ANY case until McConnell does the job his oath and the Constitution requires him to do.
Make him and the Republican Party pay for their illegal and morally bankrupt intransigence by keeping an endless focus on their self-serving obdurateness.
In other words, keep his feet on the fire where they belong.
Make him and the Republican Party pay for their illegal and morally bankrupt intransigence by keeping an endless focus on their self-serving obdurateness.
In other words, keep his feet on the fire where they belong.
3
The great thing about the decision, aside from affirming the basic tenets of the constitutionally of women's reproductive rights enumerated in Roe v. Wade and Casey, is the point by point smackdown of the 3 Dubya appointees on the Fifth Circus, Judges Haynes, Elrod, and Prado, who voted per curiam to uphold the nakedly transparent scheme of the Texas legislature to deny women in that state access to abortions.
The fetid legacy of these judges will be that of dishonest right wing mandarins who would put politics over the Constitution in functionality denying literally hundreds of thousands of women in Texas the right to choose their own reproductive fates.
The Fifth Circus used to be a hallowed Court in the days of judicial giants like John Minor Wisdom who handed down seminal decisions regarding the inherent injustice of racial discrimination.
No more.
Now, thanks to appointments of Reagan and Dubya, it is a Court comprised mainly of jaundiced political hacks doing the bidding of the Tea Party, big business, nativists, and evangelicals.
The fetid legacy of these judges will be that of dishonest right wing mandarins who would put politics over the Constitution in functionality denying literally hundreds of thousands of women in Texas the right to choose their own reproductive fates.
The Fifth Circus used to be a hallowed Court in the days of judicial giants like John Minor Wisdom who handed down seminal decisions regarding the inherent injustice of racial discrimination.
No more.
Now, thanks to appointments of Reagan and Dubya, it is a Court comprised mainly of jaundiced political hacks doing the bidding of the Tea Party, big business, nativists, and evangelicals.
8
If only there was a way the tables be turned on men, that is taking away some reproductive right of theirs. But alas, this was about women's rights being taken away and/or repressed. And the Supreme Court was just and fair today.
Bad enough women have not been able to make salaries that men make. Women were not allowed to vote, but men could. But then we have to kowtow bodily rights, too?
Telling us what we could and could not do with our bodies? And then trying to manipulate that it's "good or better for our health" for doctors to have admitting privileges and equipment and surgical suites to be fit for a king, did I say king, yes, not queen, for healthcare clinics.
Let us repeat - less than 0.3% of abortions have complications which would require hospitalization post the procedure. Yet all this time and all this money has been spent in an effort to take yet another right away from women. There never was any credence in these ridiculous laws.
Thank goodness the Supreme Court did their homework. Calling these laws helpful in making women's lives safer was hogwash from the start, demeaning. And the undue and unnecessary strife these laws put women through with the closing of women's healthcare providers cannot be forgiven.
Remember who pressed for these laws when it is time to vote again. And that goes for Assemblyman Robin Vos of Wisconsin. Even today he is bellering about now how are women going to be safe? Really?
Bad enough women have not been able to make salaries that men make. Women were not allowed to vote, but men could. But then we have to kowtow bodily rights, too?
Telling us what we could and could not do with our bodies? And then trying to manipulate that it's "good or better for our health" for doctors to have admitting privileges and equipment and surgical suites to be fit for a king, did I say king, yes, not queen, for healthcare clinics.
Let us repeat - less than 0.3% of abortions have complications which would require hospitalization post the procedure. Yet all this time and all this money has been spent in an effort to take yet another right away from women. There never was any credence in these ridiculous laws.
Thank goodness the Supreme Court did their homework. Calling these laws helpful in making women's lives safer was hogwash from the start, demeaning. And the undue and unnecessary strife these laws put women through with the closing of women's healthcare providers cannot be forgiven.
Remember who pressed for these laws when it is time to vote again. And that goes for Assemblyman Robin Vos of Wisconsin. Even today he is bellering about now how are women going to be safe? Really?
74
So, a place where a medical procedure is carried out does not have to meet the same standards / requirements as where other out-patient procedures are carried out? Ok...
Then, if you advocate for those requirements, you are "anti-woman"...hmmmm.
And as anti-woman, you are against a woman;s right to choose...which I am not.
I think all women (and men) should have the right to choose.
So why do all woman have mandatory health care and no right to choose that? Or what her child can eat at a school meal?
Or whether my 19 year old son can enjoy a beer with his dad?
I guess the right to choose is whatever the liberal left says it is.
Then, if you advocate for those requirements, you are "anti-woman"...hmmmm.
And as anti-woman, you are against a woman;s right to choose...which I am not.
I think all women (and men) should have the right to choose.
So why do all woman have mandatory health care and no right to choose that? Or what her child can eat at a school meal?
Or whether my 19 year old son can enjoy a beer with his dad?
I guess the right to choose is whatever the liberal left says it is.
1
I think you need a basic lesson in modes of reasoning or as it is called, logic which has nothing to do with liberal or conservative views.
5
If I were a fetus, I would say to the Republicans, "With friends like you, who needs enemies?"
Gandhi and Mother Teresa opposed abortion, but they had moral credibility. The Republicans have hardly any that I can see.
And when they oppose contraception and say "Life begins at conception" they have made it impossible to arrive at a workable compromise.
In a way it is good because Texas' lies were not accepted by the SC.
And then again it is bad because the massacre continues.
But the NYT gives green arrows to everyone who endorses abortion - you will probably not see my words published.
Gandhi and Mother Teresa opposed abortion, but they had moral credibility. The Republicans have hardly any that I can see.
And when they oppose contraception and say "Life begins at conception" they have made it impossible to arrive at a workable compromise.
In a way it is good because Texas' lies were not accepted by the SC.
And then again it is bad because the massacre continues.
But the NYT gives green arrows to everyone who endorses abortion - you will probably not see my words published.
2
Ludwig The NYT did publish your comment. The operative word regarding abortion is "choice". If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. But it is none of your business if a woman exercises her Constitutional right to make her own "choice"...whether or not to terminate a pregnancy.
10
There is something fundamental that you seem to forget or choose to ignore. Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to abort fetuses you want to preserve. regardless of whether they are viable or not. What I am saying is that you cannot decide for me what I want to do with my life. PERIOD.
9
"Perhaps, he postulated, older doctors in those clinics had decided to retire — on the very same day."
Perhaps?
Three GOP judges go down the rabbit hole without a shred of embarrassment.
Perhaps?
Three GOP judges go down the rabbit hole without a shred of embarrassment.
11
"Perhaps, he [Alito] postulated, older doctors in those clinics had decided to retire — on the very same day."
Alito really said that? I thought SCOTUS justices were smart and rational, not dispensers of specious logic. Does he think the rest of us are as dumb as that remark?
Alito really said that? I thought SCOTUS justices were smart and rational, not dispensers of specious logic. Does he think the rest of us are as dumb as that remark?
13
This is a great and liberating victory for women, for humanity, and for the practice of medicine.
But it is unnerving that a fickle, elderly Catholic male, Justice Anthony Kennedy, essentially controls these decisions—in our current democracy.
A physician MD
But it is unnerving that a fickle, elderly Catholic male, Justice Anthony Kennedy, essentially controls these decisions—in our current democracy.
A physician MD
9
There is no way the decision would have been unanimous with the likes of Roberts, Alito and Thomas on the Scotus.... Bush 2, Bush 2 and Bush 1...anyone question the importance of getting out and voting?
Here's the thing, there might be many of us who oppose or who would not choose to have an abortion personally but we really don't believe the government in any form should have a right to tell us what to do in our personal lives.
If this so called "law" was allowed to stand, would Texas have been very different from Afghanistan under the Taliban when it came to the rights of its female citizens?
Here's the thing, there might be many of us who oppose or who would not choose to have an abortion personally but we really don't believe the government in any form should have a right to tell us what to do in our personal lives.
If this so called "law" was allowed to stand, would Texas have been very different from Afghanistan under the Taliban when it came to the rights of its female citizens?
13
It's clear that Roberts, Alito and Thomas care not a bit about the precedents set by prior Supreme Court decisions. They would cast them aside to achieve their activist goals, using absurd logic that even a kindergartener wouldn't fall for.
Thank goodness that Kennedy isn't quite as much of a conservative activist.
Thank goodness that Kennedy isn't quite as much of a conservative activist.
10
As abortion rights advocates feared that mounting obstacles to abortions could result in a return to back alley procedures, now they must fear a return to opponents' subtle encouragement of violence against providers and the open mouth surprise they express at the idea that anyone would actually do so.
1
So three members of our highest court ruled that making low-income women, many of whom don't own a car, travel hundreds of miles to visit a clinic, was somehow not an undue burden. Unbelievable.
12
Apparently Alito is trying to beat Thomas for most embarrassingly moronic Supreme.
5
Fantastic, a decision predicated on data. Sadly it seems that the attempt to rationalize the ridiculous and risible attempts to limit personal freedom by promoting "public health" was not a unanimous effort. It could well be said that this court, and all others, should use such data driven approaches to address other matters in which Republican politicians create laws to protect us from harm. Witness the efforts by Republican dominated states to restrict voting and voter registration measures. Like the restrictions on abortion clinics these measures are made to seem as if they are protecting someone. In this case the body politic from voter fraud. Yet voter fraud is so rare as to be non-existent. Nonetheless, the courts provide deference to states rights to control the voting process. Why is the Republican party so willing to restrict personal freedoms in the name of public health or safety yet are adamant in opposing measures to prevent the public from truly noxious if not outright catastrophic events....like climate change, or environmental pollution, or workplace injuries or defective consumer products........
3
The dissenters raised technicalities to prove that the impact of the Texas law on the abortion clinics didn't matter. Why such dissents are written mystifies me. They just make clearer which arguments failed and will not work in the future. It strengthens the sweep of the majority opinion to know which arguments of the dissenters were unconvincing. Keep it up guys.
2
It's hard to resist making a nasty acronym out of Roberts, Alito, and Thomas, but they must atleast be identified as repeat violators of our American sense of liberty. All three have let their religious beliefs deform their interpretations of our laws. In November, vote for Hillary,and help ensure that this malign trio is kept caged in their own small conservative clique--without power to affect the liberal judicial majority.
194
Dear Roamin' Roman,
Religious beliefs are fine for those who see abortion as a religious issue.
But it is far more than that. Primarily, abortion is a biological issue. A high school biology course will tell you the obvious fact that a human fetus is human. No one, not even Justice Blackman, can say when a non-human fetus becomes human.
The fetus is viable when it is conceived, not at 26 weeks. The only logical conclusion to this tragedy of human destruction is to know it for what it is: an execution of the powerless human fetus.
50,000,000 abortions deaths later, and you and your ilk still don't get it.
Religious beliefs are fine for those who see abortion as a religious issue.
But it is far more than that. Primarily, abortion is a biological issue. A high school biology course will tell you the obvious fact that a human fetus is human. No one, not even Justice Blackman, can say when a non-human fetus becomes human.
The fetus is viable when it is conceived, not at 26 weeks. The only logical conclusion to this tragedy of human destruction is to know it for what it is: an execution of the powerless human fetus.
50,000,000 abortions deaths later, and you and your ilk still don't get it.
1
Love it ... the RAT division of the Supremes
2
I should not have to remind you of this, but many people faithful to their theology's doctrines so often forget that in the US we abide by a constitution whose first amendment is:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
You are at liberty to invest a human fetus of any chronological age of gestation with all the religious significance you wish, but the laws governing us all do not permit your beliefs to be the law of the land in lieu of mine.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
You are at liberty to invest a human fetus of any chronological age of gestation with all the religious significance you wish, but the laws governing us all do not permit your beliefs to be the law of the land in lieu of mine.
6
I am personally not comfortable with the use of abortion, but unabashedly support the right of a woman to seek abortions when necessary after consultation with a Physician. It should be safe, clean, professional and without stigma like any other medical procedure.
We need to put a cap on this issue- it is either legal or illegal. This cat and mouse stuff has been going on since the Nixon era.
We need to put a cap on this issue- it is either legal or illegal. This cat and mouse stuff has been going on since the Nixon era.
60
"We need to put a cap on this issue."
Well, David Gregory, it's going to take men like you in the "deep red South" to do so. You and others like you need to take a stronger, more vocal stand against the extreme religious zealots repeatedly elected to state legislatures and also sent to the US Congress, especially the House of Representatives. You must also stand against this idea that religion belongs in the public sphere. "Freedom of religion" has come to mean religion is free to impose itself on others who want nothing to do with it and its talabanic ways of hijacking legislatures and society. Finally, you must speak out when district boundaries are redrawn and gerrymandered dicennially to produce extremely lopsided over-representation of conservative strongholds while the majority is far more moderate.
Abortion was settled back when I was in third grade and there's been little issue since here in California. It's been places like the Midwest and South that have carried it on, often with the blessing or complacency of voters like you. Make abortion rights a litmus issue next local election!
Well, David Gregory, it's going to take men like you in the "deep red South" to do so. You and others like you need to take a stronger, more vocal stand against the extreme religious zealots repeatedly elected to state legislatures and also sent to the US Congress, especially the House of Representatives. You must also stand against this idea that religion belongs in the public sphere. "Freedom of religion" has come to mean religion is free to impose itself on others who want nothing to do with it and its talabanic ways of hijacking legislatures and society. Finally, you must speak out when district boundaries are redrawn and gerrymandered dicennially to produce extremely lopsided over-representation of conservative strongholds while the majority is far more moderate.
Abortion was settled back when I was in third grade and there's been little issue since here in California. It's been places like the Midwest and South that have carried it on, often with the blessing or complacency of voters like you. Make abortion rights a litmus issue next local election!
8
It *was* decided and long ago!
1
The Texas GOP and the 5th Circuit (en banc) approve of deceit if it serves their ends. Apparently, so does a minority of the Supreme Court. In Texas, we have to wait a long time for justice until a day like today. Hooray!
79
Thank you Cecile Richards, thank you Wendy Davis and the brave women and men who have fought to provide and defend services for women. If men had complicated bodies and issues to contend with, perhaps, the 3 dissenting justices, self-righteous politicians such as the shallow Rick Perry and women who cannot afford healthcare services or are in dire need of supportive hands and professionals to make difficult decisions and move through them, would understand what is needed to sustain the gender upon whom the continuation of life depends. Would it be so easy to solve problems with Viagra.
53
The editorial hits the topic on the nose by saying the decision should have been unanimous. In fact, it is troubling that three Supreme Court justices saw this incredibly contrived and deliberate attack on abortion rights, wrapped in medical sophistry, as anything else! These are supposed to be highly esteemed defenders of our constitution, yet they continue to look at clearly partisan laws in a way that makes a mockery of both common sense and the intent of our Founders.
I think it is worth recalling other major decisions now, like Gore/Bush, Heller, and Citizen's, that were similar partisan hack jobs, where the conservatives circles around reason. It would be wonderful if these "thinkers" could think for themselves.
Finally, I hope all readers note that the editorial stopped short of reminding us that a court seat is still up for grabs, and that the Republicans are still playing politics with basic rights. I hope voters do not take this vote only as a "major win", but also as a reminder that it was not a shut out, unanimous vote. I hope we can all remain vigilant that from the standpoint of the court, the next election matters more than most.
I think it is worth recalling other major decisions now, like Gore/Bush, Heller, and Citizen's, that were similar partisan hack jobs, where the conservatives circles around reason. It would be wonderful if these "thinkers" could think for themselves.
Finally, I hope all readers note that the editorial stopped short of reminding us that a court seat is still up for grabs, and that the Republicans are still playing politics with basic rights. I hope voters do not take this vote only as a "major win", but also as a reminder that it was not a shut out, unanimous vote. I hope we can all remain vigilant that from the standpoint of the court, the next election matters more than most.
156
The 'RAT' team continue to make a mockery of the Supreme Court as well!
2
The court finally gets it right on abortion. Justice Alito is the shame of NJ. He has absolutely no respect for the constitution, contrary to his own beliefs. To not see the wrong in the Texas law is quite rather laughable.
88
Will there come a day when the woman, the one with a face, a brain, a heart, lungs, arms and legs, all fully formed, be seen as a person, not as an incubator for a fertilized egg?
149
I believe this statement defines the problem very well.
4
After reading the brief of the various medical societies it is astounding to me that Roberts, Alito and Thomas could still vote to sustain this Texas law. This clearly shows me that these conservative judges, just as those on the Fifth Circuit did in the appeal leading to this case, had no interest in facts and had obviously pre-judged this case based on their radical Catholic views of abortion.
Roberts' ridiculous proposition that the clinics closed due to retirement of older doctors on the very day the law took effect is one of the low points of his leadership of the court,
Roberts' ridiculous proposition that the clinics closed due to retirement of older doctors on the very day the law took effect is one of the low points of his leadership of the court,
122
The Roberts Court legacy of hack advocacy for so called "conservative" causes is a stain on the history of the SCOTUS integrity. Citizen United will probably be what Roberts' cohorts are remembered for, but it is important in decisions like this one to see them demonstrate, even in the minority,, their bald faced advocacy for specific outcomes and abandonment of respectable judicial process. Fortunately, it appears that their reign is nearing an end as the extreme right wing is not going to be in a position to appoint more partisan hacks any time soon.
1
The three justices are anything but conservative.
The real motive behind this law is as transparent as the real motive behind voter photo ID laws.
101
Aren't these people just awful? So transparent, and so wrong.
Thank You, Ms. Greenhouse. I love your articles on Supreme Court decisions.
14
It is a shame that the decision was not unanimous. How do the three judges opposing sleep at night- don't they have families? How can the extremists snatch women's right? What's the difference between us and other nations where women are treated as second class citizen. The extremist party aka the Republican Party are winning elections by fear, division and hate mongering. The division and hatred are destroying our great nation. While the infrastructure of our nation are falling apart, the party champions hatred and division to distract us to address the real issues. The pathetic party survives by "gun, God and abortion" smear. When will the people wake up and see the true dark color of the party who cares least for what is good for the people.
40
I've posted this before, but am fortunately too old to be embarrassed by my own recurring, repetitive stories.
My great-grandmother, Nancy Lydia Rittenhouse Hiob, died of a back-alley abortion in 1903. I have no idea who she was. Nobody does. No photographs. She's the ghost of a ghost. (I've only recently begun to realize that my sister, Nancy, was probably named after her.)
Nancy Lydia was married and had a small daughter, about three years old, my grandmother, Gertrude (Gramma Gert) ... a laughing, sturdy, slightly naughty woman who then lived a hard life and spent many of her years as a dependent nanny in a big white house.
It's likely that Nancy Lydia's husband, the St. Louis tinsmith, Alfred Hiob, was complicit in this decision to end the pregnancy, because they decided that they couldn't afford more children so soon. No doubt Nancy died of septicemia.
Hallelujah for this Supreme Court decision.
My great-grandmother, Nancy Lydia Rittenhouse Hiob, died of a back-alley abortion in 1903. I have no idea who she was. Nobody does. No photographs. She's the ghost of a ghost. (I've only recently begun to realize that my sister, Nancy, was probably named after her.)
Nancy Lydia was married and had a small daughter, about three years old, my grandmother, Gertrude (Gramma Gert) ... a laughing, sturdy, slightly naughty woman who then lived a hard life and spent many of her years as a dependent nanny in a big white house.
It's likely that Nancy Lydia's husband, the St. Louis tinsmith, Alfred Hiob, was complicit in this decision to end the pregnancy, because they decided that they couldn't afford more children so soon. No doubt Nancy died of septicemia.
Hallelujah for this Supreme Court decision.
270
I can only conclude that woman who are able to obtain free birth control pills and don't take them and as a result have unwanted pregnancies are largely Hillary Clinton supporters who are basically for Hillary because she is a woman regardless of being a proven liar and as crooked as the day is long. President Obama has made birth control free for everyone who wishes to use it. That would be every method. Why are woman still having unwanted pregnancies? How stupid are they? Very I think.
My own grandmother Elizabeth told me a story about a young woman she worked with in a photography studio. They tinted photographs, which seems a metaphor but was only a job for young, artistically inclined young women just out of high school in New Haven, CT around 1927. Rosy water color cheeks and red lips and blue skies, maybe blue eyes. The woman she worked with, a girl, really, was very pretty and very innocent. The owner of the studio seduced her, she got pregnant and died from a back alley abortion.
So many ghosts. All these men who insist they make the rules. You keep telling that story.
So many ghosts. All these men who insist they make the rules. You keep telling that story.
8
The abortion lobby depends on myths...
The myth of the "back ally" abortion..
The myth of rape and incest pregnancy..
The myth that its a women's body..
The myth that an unborn child is not a separate living being..
The myth that abortion is routine, normal and without consequences..
Go, believe your myths.
The myth of the "back ally" abortion..
The myth of rape and incest pregnancy..
The myth that its a women's body..
The myth that an unborn child is not a separate living being..
The myth that abortion is routine, normal and without consequences..
Go, believe your myths.
1
Despite the legal victory for a woman's right to choose, in practice her exercise of that right will continue to face obstacles in Texas. When the law was passed, over half the abortion clinics in Texas closed, and most of these, it was reported today, will not reopen.
While Governor Abbott and his minions are performing all the rituals expected of losers (weeping, gnashing of teeth, tearing of garments), they know full well that they have already achieved their main objective. The legislature, moreover, will soon enough enact a new measure, with a different false rationale, that will erect alternative obstacles in the path of women seeking an abortion. Any appeal to SCOTUS will take years, during which time more clinics may close.
Affluent women will confront inconveniences, but not insurmountable difficulties, in getting an abortion. Poor and working class women, on the other hand, lack the resources to enable them to defeat the guerrilla war tactics of the legislature. Only an aroused electorate can stop these efforts to circumvent the judgments of SCOTUS, but in Texas, at least, a significant portion of that electorate opposes abortion. Texans embrace gun-ownership rights enthusiastically; abortion rights, not so much.
While Governor Abbott and his minions are performing all the rituals expected of losers (weeping, gnashing of teeth, tearing of garments), they know full well that they have already achieved their main objective. The legislature, moreover, will soon enough enact a new measure, with a different false rationale, that will erect alternative obstacles in the path of women seeking an abortion. Any appeal to SCOTUS will take years, during which time more clinics may close.
Affluent women will confront inconveniences, but not insurmountable difficulties, in getting an abortion. Poor and working class women, on the other hand, lack the resources to enable them to defeat the guerrilla war tactics of the legislature. Only an aroused electorate can stop these efforts to circumvent the judgments of SCOTUS, but in Texas, at least, a significant portion of that electorate opposes abortion. Texans embrace gun-ownership rights enthusiastically; abortion rights, not so much.
50
Which is why we need to find out how to direct contributions to Texas
I often wonder how a group of normal people can embrace one freedom given by the constitution to the bitter end while fighting to take away another freedom.
1
Wonderful news! Especially for the Gosnells out there.
5
The increasingly bold attacks by lawmakers in various states on the Constitutional rights of women are frightening. While the Supreme Court has wisely ruled against Texas' lying lawmakers allegedly altruistic laws protecting us "little ladies" from eternal damnation - oops, I mean medical mistakes, what doctor, in his/her right mind, will want to open a practice providing comprehensive reproductive health care in such an environment? Needless to say, women's health services in many of the areas under attack by the regressive wrongs of the right wing are provided by Planned Parenthood -- under attack as well.
With a Republican Congress so bold that they will blatantly ignore their sworn Constitutional duty to vet the President's selected candidate for the vacancy on the Supreme Court in the hope that their party will win the 2016 election, it is a huge relief to see there are still five justices willing to stand together to say "NO!"
With a Republican Congress so bold that they will blatantly ignore their sworn Constitutional duty to vet the President's selected candidate for the vacancy on the Supreme Court in the hope that their party will win the 2016 election, it is a huge relief to see there are still five justices willing to stand together to say "NO!"
37
"For years, the court has looked the other way as lawmakers around the country have grown increasingly bold in their efforts to weaken or obliterate a woman’s right to reproductive freedom."
As they have in restricting other freedoms, including the right to vote through gerrymandering and cumbersome anti-franchise voter ID laws and polling hours.
But here we discuss abortion: one of the most politically and emotionally fraught issues of our time. Otherwise know as the right to choose to terminate pregnancy, almost always because of compelling reasons such as rape, spousal abandonment, or incest.
I firmly believe no woman enters an abortion clinic lightly, as it's one of the most wrenching decisions a woman can make. The fact that male politicians, kowtowing to the religious right, took on this crusade to make abortions impossible, introduced the element of religion--their regard for religion, mind you, not the woman's--into the debate.
It's deeply insulting to any woman that the right to make her own personal health decisions would be abrogated by cynical politicians insisting on imposing their own conservative agenda on women anguishing over a choice she wishes she never had to make.
Thankfully the court majority agreed.
As they have in restricting other freedoms, including the right to vote through gerrymandering and cumbersome anti-franchise voter ID laws and polling hours.
But here we discuss abortion: one of the most politically and emotionally fraught issues of our time. Otherwise know as the right to choose to terminate pregnancy, almost always because of compelling reasons such as rape, spousal abandonment, or incest.
I firmly believe no woman enters an abortion clinic lightly, as it's one of the most wrenching decisions a woman can make. The fact that male politicians, kowtowing to the religious right, took on this crusade to make abortions impossible, introduced the element of religion--their regard for religion, mind you, not the woman's--into the debate.
It's deeply insulting to any woman that the right to make her own personal health decisions would be abrogated by cynical politicians insisting on imposing their own conservative agenda on women anguishing over a choice she wishes she never had to make.
Thankfully the court majority agreed.
99
While I agree with much of what you say here, "almost always because of compelling reasons such as rape, spousal abandonment, or incest," give me pause.
Because I don't believe that's true. Compelling reasons include other things that are not so immoral; and the primary reason for abortion isn't that a moral wrong was done to the woman, but the economic costs of raising a child. A lot of women who opt to end a pregnancy do so because they already have children, and realize they cannot afford another. A lot of woman had a birth-control failure. Some simply didn't bother to use birth control.
Weighting the moral reasons why we should have access to abortion -- including rape, incest, abuse, abandonment -- obscures the real moral imperative here: it is moral for women to have control of their bodies. Full stop. Women do suffer all the horrors that you point out, but that is not why abortion is or is not immoral; it is moral because without full reproductive health care, women cannot fully participate; and the evidence of this is all of history, filled with the voices and decisions of men, who were free to participate while the women bore and raised their children.
Because I don't believe that's true. Compelling reasons include other things that are not so immoral; and the primary reason for abortion isn't that a moral wrong was done to the woman, but the economic costs of raising a child. A lot of women who opt to end a pregnancy do so because they already have children, and realize they cannot afford another. A lot of woman had a birth-control failure. Some simply didn't bother to use birth control.
Weighting the moral reasons why we should have access to abortion -- including rape, incest, abuse, abandonment -- obscures the real moral imperative here: it is moral for women to have control of their bodies. Full stop. Women do suffer all the horrors that you point out, but that is not why abortion is or is not immoral; it is moral because without full reproductive health care, women cannot fully participate; and the evidence of this is all of history, filled with the voices and decisions of men, who were free to participate while the women bore and raised their children.
10
Christine - the reasons you gave "almost always" are far out there.
While we are glad and thankful for the SCOTUS decision, let's not cheapen it by being dishonest. Women's reasons are their own private concerns anyhow.
While we are glad and thankful for the SCOTUS decision, let's not cheapen it by being dishonest. Women's reasons are their own private concerns anyhow.
4
The Texas attorney general negated his argument about "protecting women's health" when he said that Southwest Texas women could just go to Las Cruces, New Mexico for the procedure. New Mexico does not have the irrelevant criteria that Texas unsuccessfully tried to impose on women.
38
If these laws weren't an undue burden nothing would be. Justice Alito (as well as Justices Roberts and Thomas) are simply opposed to a woman's constitutional right to make her own reproductive decisions. The idea that these laws were in anyway valid under Casey doesn't meet the laugh test. The dissent knows it (and if they don't that's just as troubling).
64
Uncleike: Alito, Roberts, Thomas: three of the Catholics on the SCOTUS. The old guy, Kennedy, and the gal, Sotomayor, Catholics also, marched to a different drum.
2
It’s shocking and shameful to read that prominent 'pro-life’ advocates like Carol Tobias, Gov. Greg Abbott, John Cornyn, Tony Perkins and many others, continue to hide behind the lie that their sole concern in promoting this bill was 'the health and safety of women'. To read that, even in defeat, these so-called Christians will stop at nothing, including lie, to make abortion illegal in the USA paradoxically driving millions of desperate women to seek dangerous, life threatening abortions. If only their money, hard work and advocacy was invested in evidence based sex education, literacy or combating domestic violence instead of this obsessive crusade against abortion. Most Australians and New Zealanders find the shenanigans and hypocrisy in the USA around guns and abortion absolutely head shaking.
133
And educated Americans agree with you.
2
The key question isn't why the Supreme Court rejected the Texas law; it's why the ruling wasn't unanimous. Any fool (no legal education required) knows that the law created an undue burden against women seeking an abortion.
109
TheBronx: Three hardline Catholic males--quelle surprise!
3
As I close in on 60 years old, having never been pregnant by choice, I couldn't be happier for the women of reproductive age in every state where their rights have had barriers thrown up before them. The fight will continue until no man has the say on what any woman chooses to do regarding her own health and future.
87
Regardless of your feelings on abortion, there's no legitimate or intellectually honest argument that the 14th Amendment's Due Process clause has anything to do with it. It's really that simple.
5
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Abridging the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States is exactly what Texas and other states have set out to do with these laws as well as other laws.
If you now, after reading "shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law", suddenly want to use it for depriving the fetus life there are a couple of things to remember. A) the fetus isn't a person, and B) the state isn't taking action.
When the constitution was framed babies often weren't considered persons until they had been baptized or had naming ceremonies and were then recognized by society as persons. This time frame coincided with the rates of infant mortality of the day. This wasn't uncommon even into the early 1800's.
Abridging the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States is exactly what Texas and other states have set out to do with these laws as well as other laws.
If you now, after reading "shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law", suddenly want to use it for depriving the fetus life there are a couple of things to remember. A) the fetus isn't a person, and B) the state isn't taking action.
When the constitution was framed babies often weren't considered persons until they had been baptized or had naming ceremonies and were then recognized by society as persons. This time frame coincided with the rates of infant mortality of the day. This wasn't uncommon even into the early 1800's.
5
Ammendment 14, Section 1: "...No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Seems pretty straightforward to me that it spells out that NO STATE can make a law that deprives me of control over my own life. It's my right and privilege as guaranteed here to control my own body, the very basis and physical manifestation of my "life". If the State required you to contribute sperm to a community sperm bank I guarantee you'd run, not walk, to the 14th Ammendment for protection against such intrusion.
It doesn't get any more legitimate or intellectually honest than that. It really is "that simple"!
Seems pretty straightforward to me that it spells out that NO STATE can make a law that deprives me of control over my own life. It's my right and privilege as guaranteed here to control my own body, the very basis and physical manifestation of my "life". If the State required you to contribute sperm to a community sperm bank I guarantee you'd run, not walk, to the 14th Ammendment for protection against such intrusion.
It doesn't get any more legitimate or intellectually honest than that. It really is "that simple"!
10
The attempts by justices Alito, Roberts and Thomas to frame this case as a constitutional issue or one of protecting women's health is pathetic and insulting to all women. This case and the laws at issue were always solely about restricting womens access to abortion. Nobody who actually cares about women's health (planned parenthood, NOW, gynecologist) supported this legislation or felt it helped women. The only supporters of these laws were people and politicians who are opposed to abortion. To see the nations highest court have three justices write a dissenting opinion impugns their judicial integrity. There was no legal issue here. At best a moral one and in any case no law they had any business supporting.
48
If a Justice opposes capital punishment, he need not rule that a particular method of such punishment is the best. Likewise, a Justice who opposes abortion need notion an opinion protecting the right to choose. Insisting that those who disagree with you compromise their beliefs is wrong. If Breyer wants to get rid of capital punishment he surely does not have to choose the best method. And if Alito doesn't believe in abortion, he doesn't have to promote it. Those who insist that others share their beliefs are certainly not liberal.
3
Hurrah for sanity and the court refusing to let some far right wing religious groups impose its beliefs on others--- THIS IS NOT A THEOCRACY YET!!!!
36
the constitution and personal freedom won over sharia law once again!! Now just waiting for the american taliban retaliation for having constitutional rigts
20
Whatever one's stance may be on abortion (I'm not a big fan but I support a woman's right to choose, and hope it's a rare event), it's hard to argue against the SC on this one. If something is a constitutional right, states have no business passing laws that make this constitutional right impossible to access. It's simply a matter of fair play. And for the state to pretend the law had anything to do with honest concerns about a woman's health is an insult to everyones' intelligence.
29
Another issue at play in Texas is the inability or unwillingness to educate enough physicians in the methods of performing abortion: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/06/learning-abortion-in-m... AND http://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2016/06/22/houston-public-media-report-... .
All sorts of forces are at play, including making training discretionary, fear of physicians in choosing to obtain training, fear that medical school funding will be cut if overt training programs are strengthened. The vast majority of Texas trainees cannot get training or find it very difficult to do so. It is not clear whether today's decision will relieve some of the these pressures on medical training programs. If not, staffing of existing clinics will become increasingly difficult in states determined to curtail lawful services.
All sorts of forces are at play, including making training discretionary, fear of physicians in choosing to obtain training, fear that medical school funding will be cut if overt training programs are strengthened. The vast majority of Texas trainees cannot get training or find it very difficult to do so. It is not clear whether today's decision will relieve some of the these pressures on medical training programs. If not, staffing of existing clinics will become increasingly difficult in states determined to curtail lawful services.
12
o ye righteous.... don't worry ... we will find another way to protect you
1
Two editorials on the abortion ruling - 3 sections of comments - and no comments on the graft permitted by the ruling on Virginia's governor? This is what will happen under Clinton. We'll get some socially liberal laws, regs, and rulings tossed our way, as long as none of them interfere with the flow of money sloshing between big business and elected officials. "Favors done were not out of the ordinary," and that's OK? Let me hear some noise about the other big SCOTUS ruling today.
3
While I completely agree that this is a win for our rights, I am troubled with these photos of wild celebration! Abortion is a sad, hugely important but sad, right to control our own bodies and our futures, not cause for public celebrations but for relief.
These photos of celebrations will play into the hands of those who will try, again and again, to remove this control over our futures; I beg for the celebrations to become a time of quiet reflection.
These photos of celebrations will play into the hands of those who will try, again and again, to remove this control over our futures; I beg for the celebrations to become a time of quiet reflection.
2
Why is the right to control my own body an occasion for sadness?
My choice is none of your concern; my body and its mechanisms are none of your concern. I might have been sad when I had my abortions (yes, more than one). Or I might have been monumentally relieved.
We celebrate the right to do what we have to do.
My choice is none of your concern; my body and its mechanisms are none of your concern. I might have been sad when I had my abortions (yes, more than one). Or I might have been monumentally relieved.
We celebrate the right to do what we have to do.
4
Perhaps, Alito postulates, the clinics all closed because older doctors all decided to retire on the same day? Perhaps, Alito isn't the essence of legal and intellectual dishonesty? Perhaps he just seems that way.
37
The fact it had to go so far and the result was in doubt says more about the shortcomings of the judicial system than anything else. This was an obvious decision, except to 3 highly partisan Supreme Court justices and a group of highly partisan Appellate Court justices in Louisiana.
The judicial system needs to get its house in order and the public should not have to expend so much energy fighting for their right in court when they should have been laughed out of the country (like the justice in Austin originally did).
The judicial system needs to get its house in order and the public should not have to expend so much energy fighting for their right in court when they should have been laughed out of the country (like the justice in Austin originally did).
17
In civil matters the US justice system is simply a place to spin wheels waste money and prove nothing. Alitio is hardly the only judicial nitwit in the system.
1
Why do the people who craft and support these restrictive laws, and the justices who uphold them, hide behind a phony concern for women's health? They are morally opposed to abortion, which is their right. But they insult all Americans by pretending to care about the health of women seeking to end a pregnancy, when their real intent to to prevent all women from exercising their constitutional right to obtain an abortion. At least Rick Perry and former Lt. Governor David Dewhurst had the honesty to state their real goal, the end to all legal abortion access. Would that Justices Thomas, Alito and Roberts were so honest.
32
Because (as Justice Ginsberg wrote) all rationalization for the Texas law was lame and empty, we now have absolute proof that three sitting Justices will do anything in their power to remove the right to abortion because of their personal beliefs. Future appointees must have more "upstairs" than that or it's the end of Roe v. Wade and more. Younger voters and all Bernie supporters MUST be helped to understand this and to be urged to vote appropriately in November. Oh for the days of JFK, whose Catholicism was feared by some to run the country, but he was much too smart for that.
24
This editorial observes "While the decision was unquestionably correct, the vote should have been unanimous". The fact is however that knowing how the court works it is extremely naive to argue that all members of the court, regardless of their ideological persuasion, should issue their rulings based on what is the sound and proper legal ruling.
The indisputable fact is that in just about every case before the court it is a foregone conclusion how each of the liberal and conservative justices will rule. A perfect example of this was the gay marriage case, where it was obvious to all that the court will be divided 4-4 with justice Kennedy casting the deciding vote.
The pattern of how each of the individual justices will rule is so predictable that experts on the court have written books that explain how the conservatives and liberals on the court vote on any given issue.
As such arguments and briefs presented before the court are nothing more than a make believe game and a waste of time that has absolutely no bearing on how the justices will rule.
The whole process of arguments before the court, in fact the very idea that the court issues its decision based upon consideration of the arguments presented before it, is a fantasy.
What a supreme court decision is based on is nothing more than counting the liberals and conservatives on the court and having Kennedy, the man in the middle issuing the tie breaking ruling.
The indisputable fact is that in just about every case before the court it is a foregone conclusion how each of the liberal and conservative justices will rule. A perfect example of this was the gay marriage case, where it was obvious to all that the court will be divided 4-4 with justice Kennedy casting the deciding vote.
The pattern of how each of the individual justices will rule is so predictable that experts on the court have written books that explain how the conservatives and liberals on the court vote on any given issue.
As such arguments and briefs presented before the court are nothing more than a make believe game and a waste of time that has absolutely no bearing on how the justices will rule.
The whole process of arguments before the court, in fact the very idea that the court issues its decision based upon consideration of the arguments presented before it, is a fantasy.
What a supreme court decision is based on is nothing more than counting the liberals and conservatives on the court and having Kennedy, the man in the middle issuing the tie breaking ruling.
2
As long as Rove v. Wade is the law of the land there should be no tolerance for guerrilla warfare against it using legalistic maneuvers justified on obviously false pretenses. I am opposed to abortion and wish that I lived in a society that respects human life more than it does, but I don't. Fortunately, I also live in a society where we who are pro-life may try to change the culture through the use of persuasion. Maybe it's time the pro-life movement directed more of its effort in that direction, and less in trying to pull off stunts in the backrooms of state legislatures.
81
I salute you, Bob K, for calling out the so called antiabortion movement for what it is.
Until there is enough support in the land for a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, it is the law of the land, and the only moral course for forthrightly pro life Americans is an absolute commitment to women's health and reproductive health services. Preventing unwanted pregnancies is the most powerful weapon against abortion.
Politicians who undermine women's health services in the name of "preventing abortions" are exposed for their mendacity, as are "documentary filmmakers" whose lies are parroted in Republican debates.
Until there is enough support in the land for a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, it is the law of the land, and the only moral course for forthrightly pro life Americans is an absolute commitment to women's health and reproductive health services. Preventing unwanted pregnancies is the most powerful weapon against abortion.
Politicians who undermine women's health services in the name of "preventing abortions" are exposed for their mendacity, as are "documentary filmmakers" whose lies are parroted in Republican debates.
5
The use of persuasion won't get you anywhere with a woman who does not want to be pregnant and has the means to abort it.
You life when you say you respect human life. Women are humans. And you obviously don't think we have the right to do what we want -- what we need to do -- with our own bodies.
You life when you say you respect human life. Women are humans. And you obviously don't think we have the right to do what we want -- what we need to do -- with our own bodies.
4
You should focus your efforts on preventing unwanted pregnancies - that's by far the quickest and most effective way of reducing the number of abortions. Texas goes out of its way to impede such progress, of course - because for the everybody-must-live-by-my-rules religionists, it's not really about the numbers.
5
We kill innocent babies..no one cares. Sad day for our country.
2
Well step right up, Dana Lowe - there are lots of opportunities for you to participate in reducing the abortion rate. May I suggest adoption, financial support of single mothers, public assistance for struggling families, better sex education, free contraception...
When you're out there on the picket lines demonstrating in favour of such actions, your opinion might count for something.
p.
When you're out there on the picket lines demonstrating in favour of such actions, your opinion might count for something.
p.
11
This is tiring. Zygotes are not "innocent babies." Haven't you been paying attention at all?
8
This was a close call; that three justices were willing to uphold this nightmare of a law shows they are no better than the misogynists in Texas that enacted it. Hopefully, this will end the attacks on women's reproductive rights, but you know they won't end. This makes the next presidential election crucial. I have no problem voting for Clinton (indeed I welcome it), but even if you do, think of women's rights and vote for her. Any other vote is a deplorable choice. We have come too far to go back to the pre-Roe days. There is only one realistic candidate that will stop that from happening.
16
"For years, the court has looked the other way as lawmakers around the country have grown increasingly bold in their efforts to weaken or obliterate a woman’s right to reproductive freedom."
I echo this sentiment entirely and while women are particularly benefitted today (seriously, congrats!), I would take the statement a step further. The court has looked the other way as lawmakers have grown bold GENERALLY in weakening or obliterating many rights. A day doesn't go by where the 4th amendment isn't weakened just a little further. Gerrymandering runs rampant. Voter I.D. laws (not unlike the law struck down today) throw on a veneer of solving a problem no one has shown to exist; gravely harming the same constituency it purports to protect. Federal lawmakers have made a career of open interference and rebellion against the Presidency in matters ranging from ANY confirmation of an appointment (not just the Supreme Court) to foreign policy (like the Iran Nuclear Deal). State and federal representatives openly encourage the illegal disregard of Supreme Court rulings with which they do not personally agree (see gay marriage). Some cities use their police and courts as a means to fill budget shortfalls by extorting (yes, extorting) money from citizens with the least ability to legally defend themselves (see Ferguson). On jurisdiction (Louisiana) basically tried to phase out the right to an attorney at trial on the sly. The list goes on... This lawlessness has to stop!
I echo this sentiment entirely and while women are particularly benefitted today (seriously, congrats!), I would take the statement a step further. The court has looked the other way as lawmakers have grown bold GENERALLY in weakening or obliterating many rights. A day doesn't go by where the 4th amendment isn't weakened just a little further. Gerrymandering runs rampant. Voter I.D. laws (not unlike the law struck down today) throw on a veneer of solving a problem no one has shown to exist; gravely harming the same constituency it purports to protect. Federal lawmakers have made a career of open interference and rebellion against the Presidency in matters ranging from ANY confirmation of an appointment (not just the Supreme Court) to foreign policy (like the Iran Nuclear Deal). State and federal representatives openly encourage the illegal disregard of Supreme Court rulings with which they do not personally agree (see gay marriage). Some cities use their police and courts as a means to fill budget shortfalls by extorting (yes, extorting) money from citizens with the least ability to legally defend themselves (see Ferguson). On jurisdiction (Louisiana) basically tried to phase out the right to an attorney at trial on the sly. The list goes on... This lawlessness has to stop!
22
Well done, Supreme Court.
Two fair and just rulings, back to back – first against illegal immigration, and the second for a woman's right to choose.
Two fair and just rulings, back to back – first against illegal immigration, and the second for a woman's right to choose.
2
I loved Justice Ginsberg's concurring opinion, where she clearly explains that the alleged Legislative Intent was patently false: this law did not protect women's health because Texas allows much riskier procedures to be legally performed outside of hospitals (including child birth), and the law would force women to significantly unsafe alternatives. Telling it like it is!
22
Another setback for the American Taliban. They will never give up until women are barefoot and pregnant like their good old days. They will not be happy until women leave the work place, lose the right to vote and criminalize birth control. This election is very important, your vote counts more than ever.
21
Why do they HATE us so much?
Why are we such a threat?
Why do they have so much resentment and animus toward us?
What have we done to these people to make them have such FEAR of us?
Is it the innate powers that we come with?
Is it our deep capacity for LOVE and giving?
Why?
Why are we such a threat?
Why do they have so much resentment and animus toward us?
What have we done to these people to make them have such FEAR of us?
Is it the innate powers that we come with?
Is it our deep capacity for LOVE and giving?
Why?
3
The struggle against the Texas law began with Wendy Davis's filibuster and has never faltered. It's a joyful day to see it struck down, but frightening that it had to go all the way to the Supreme Court to happen. I was a teenager here in Texas when Roe v Wade became law, and it's appalling that so many people don't remember or know about the dangerous days before it. Hearing all the sanctimonious talk from Perry and his minions about protecting the health and safety of Texas women with their obstructive law was sickening. It will be a great pleasure to see these laws disappear in all states where they exist. November's election could not be more important to ensuring the SCOTUS can continue to stop this kind of erosion of reproductive freedom and civil rights. Do everything you can to help get out the vote, it truly matters!
218
This is a tremendous victory. What is frightening is that any justices dissented at all, after being presented with the facts and consequences of destructive and deceitful laws like these. Those dissenting clearly do not have the ability to see reason, or to value the rights of citizens in this country.
19
To everyone who believes in the autonomy of women and their right to control their own bodies, this is a great victory. That said, we wouldn't be in this position if abortion hadn't been ghettoized in the first place, and instead was simply part of the offerings of obstetrics/gynecology practices. What a mistake that was.
16
Justice Alito postulated, older doctors in those clinics had decided to retire — on the very same day, as noted in the editorial. Perhaps all 3 of these "justices" would retire on the same day very soon and continue with their political careers instead of claiming to dispense justice.
37
I respect their right to want to outlaw abortion again. Their right to not want any federal money going to places which provide abortions. What I don't respect is their inability to honestly state their intentions. Like many in the conservative party, they believe that the ends justifies the means. Don't lie about why you are putting these provisions in place. You want abortion to go away as a legal right for women. You might 'think' that it's best for the women but it's just your opinion, nothing more.
Stop lying. Just say what you want to achieve. You want abortions clinics to close. Women to have no access to it in your state.
Stop lying. Just say what you want to achieve. You want abortions clinics to close. Women to have no access to it in your state.
15
Ted Cruz responded: “Unfortunately, the Supreme Court sided with abortion extremists who care more about providing abortion-on-demand than they do protecting women’s health." Cruz's short response is loaded with falsehoods. First, abortion providers are not "extremists," they are medical professionals. Second, the Supreme Court has previously and repeatedly upheld abortion rights as the law of the land.
Third, this is about protecting women's health. Making safe, legal abortion accessible to women is a fundamental part of health care, but patronizing, arbitrary laws are not. And this is from Cruz, who opposes guaranteed health care and thought that adequate family planning was found in a bathroom dispensary.
Third, this is about protecting women's health. Making safe, legal abortion accessible to women is a fundamental part of health care, but patronizing, arbitrary laws are not. And this is from Cruz, who opposes guaranteed health care and thought that adequate family planning was found in a bathroom dispensary.
24
This ruling is also about protecting women's rights to control their reproductive destiny and futures, as well as their health!
2
We will not be kept down. No more! Attempts to keep us barefoot and pregnant will not work!
16
A victory for women and common sense today. The crass attempts by conservatives to limit a woman's right to choose was derailed by this decision. It is shameful that Justices Alito, Roberts and Thomas obviously let personal opinion take precedence over the law.
14
As a young person I had no strong opinion about abortion, and didn't consider other peoples' choices to be any of my business. That changed when I was a student and worked part time in a Catholic hospital. A pregnant pre-teen girl arrived in the emergency ward bleeding from self-inflicted wounds. She had tried to end the pregnancy with a sharp object. The staff immediately set about trying to 'save the baby', which left many of us shocked. They were more concerned about a fetus than an abused child.
No matter how you feel about abortions, they are going to happen. All women, regardless of their age or income, should have the right to make their own reproductive choices.
No matter how you feel about abortions, they are going to happen. All women, regardless of their age or income, should have the right to make their own reproductive choices.
310
If it was between me and one of my sons Id want them to take me.
The Texas abortion bill was clearly not an appropriate regulation of statewide abortions. It wasn't even arguably a legitimate health measure. And the Republican legislative leadership had to know thist. Nonetheless, it appears that the legislature was lazy rather than devious. It is believed that the abortion bill was drafted by Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion think tank. The bill was then passed on the Governor Perry, who forwarded it to the legislature. Apparently, the legislature relied on Perry and the AUL, and pretty much rubber-stamped the bill. What went wrong here is that the legislators didn't do their due diligence and merely signed off on an inappropriate bill. I'm sure everyone wants to label the legislature as dishonest and fanatic. But I believe the facts indicate that they were lazy and incompetent.
2
They really don't have a clue what their constitutional powers are and are not.
US state legislatures make Congress look like geniuses by comparison.
US state legislatures make Congress look like geniuses by comparison.
3
Maybe so, Michjas. But it seems to me that all four of your adjectives - lazy, incompetent, dishonest and fanatic - all apply to these so-called public servants.
p.
p.
2
The Roe v Wade decision came about partially in response to the public dismay over the number of women and girls that were dying from back-alley abortions. Today many are not old enough to remember that, but I do.
I am elated that the Supreme Court ruled that we are not going to go back to that era. Those who TRULY want to reduce the number of abortions will embrace the ready availability of inexpensive contraceptives, plus frank, complete sex education in our schools. Those who are in opposition in those two areas are denying reality.
We cannot allow religious idealists to prevent an ACTUAL reduction in the number of abortions or to cause the deaths of desperate women. The separation of church and state must be strongly enforced!
I would also like to see high school parenting classes and courses that teach how to create a good marriage/partnership. Alas, I live in Texas, so I do't have much hope of seeing that soon.
I am elated that the Supreme Court ruled that we are not going to go back to that era. Those who TRULY want to reduce the number of abortions will embrace the ready availability of inexpensive contraceptives, plus frank, complete sex education in our schools. Those who are in opposition in those two areas are denying reality.
We cannot allow religious idealists to prevent an ACTUAL reduction in the number of abortions or to cause the deaths of desperate women. The separation of church and state must be strongly enforced!
I would also like to see high school parenting classes and courses that teach how to create a good marriage/partnership. Alas, I live in Texas, so I do't have much hope of seeing that soon.
187
Thank God Roe vs Wade did not suffer a fatal blow as many had feared. A law's desired outcome should be transparent. Government should not be in the business of creating farcical legislation for masquerading an ulterior motive. Especially when so many anti abortion elected officials barely even bothered to keep up appearances about the intent of the TRAP laws.
14
Yes! This is great news for women across the country. SB5, the legislative Texas two-step restricting women's access to a medical procedure that belongs solely, rightly and privately to them, has been struck down, and women's right to choose has been preserved. For now. Judging by how the SCOTUS vote went, it becomes even more obvious (as if it were ever a question) that there must be a Democrat in the White House to appoint the next Supreme Court judge.
15
The cruelest irony is that the very measures which would reduce the need for abortion are summarily rejected by Republicans, who instead write punitive legislation. They craft unconstitutional laws to make a standard medical procedure elusive, while they promote meaningless abstinence-only "sex ed", fight insurance coverage for birth control, defund and vilify Planned Parenthood. If they sincerely wanted to reduce the need for abortion, the solutions are at hand.
317
"The cruelest irony is that the very measures which would reduce the need for abortion are summarily rejected by Republicans"
To Republicans, this is not irony at all. Theie purpose in opposing access to abortion is to maintain control on the sexuality and autonomy of women. As is well known, the incidence of spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) is very high. People who are interested in the health of women and fetuses would be working to provide good health care to all women of childbearing potential. Republicans, in fact, obstruct the provision of health care to women and fetuses.
To Republicans, this is not irony at all. Theie purpose in opposing access to abortion is to maintain control on the sexuality and autonomy of women. As is well known, the incidence of spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) is very high. People who are interested in the health of women and fetuses would be working to provide good health care to all women of childbearing potential. Republicans, in fact, obstruct the provision of health care to women and fetuses.
4
"About her own body"
Abortion (death to an unborn life) is the greatest tragedy in the history of the United States.
Abortion (death to an unborn life) is the greatest tragedy in the history of the United States.
1
Robert, when you become pregnant, the decision - to abort or not - will be yours.
Until then, it's simply none of your business.
p.
Until then, it's simply none of your business.
p.
12
No, it is not. Trying to make slaves out of women is.
11
Your god seems willing to end millions of pregnancies, all over the globe - and he's been at if far longer than your religion has been in existence.
9
Laws out of Texas like the one that got into the Right's back channel to this inept Roberts Court are out of the Stone Age. Conception and pregnancy are for a woman to decide; none other. The only way this threadbare piece of contortion got to the Supreme Court is because of all the dark money that ALEC and the Koch Bottles flood to the Red States. We've got to overturn Citizens United. Without it, this foolish challenge never sees the light of day. Make no mistake amidst your merry-making; For V. Wade is still in the Right's cross hairs. As long as John Roberts and Samuel Alito and Clarence "Uncle" Thomas don the robes, freedom isn't free. Ceaseless vigilance may prevail; lax acceptance is a dreaded enemy.
11
The partisan split in the court is a reminder of the large gulf that separates the two parties and the importance of voting for a presidential candidate who will appoint justice(s?) who will protect the rights of women. Whichever candidate that might be.
8
Voting to return the US Senate to a majority of Democrats will ensure that all future nominees for Supreme Court openings will be taken up in an open and timely manner. This is as urgent as electing a qualified and competent person for President. Republican's are responsible for eroding our country.
4
The evangelicals won't give up. They put their diabolical imaginations to work on ways to deprive women of their constitutional rights and it will be something else next legislative session in these state houses. Watch for fetuses feeling pain bills next and who knows what they'll come up with. They are religious zealots and there is no reasoning with them. They won't take no for an answer even from the Supreme Court.
15
Blind faith remains blind.
2
Please note: the 3 idealogue hacks who voted against a woman's right to control her own body.
Please vote in November.
Please vote in November.
19
All men!!
2
Abortion, when legal, is among the safest of all medical procedures, but among the most dangerous when illegal. It is transparently disingenuous to legislate arbitrary restrictions for abortion providers, which will reduce access to safe, legal abortions, in the name of protecting women's health.
17
"Monday’s ruling should spell the end for many if not most of these regressive, unconstitutional laws."
Yeah, well, sure, but it won't. Republican-led legislatures will continue to waste our time and our money introducing similarly unconstitutional bills, which will pass, be signed into law, and then legally challenged.
The only way to avoid this scenario from continuing to play out in state after state, year after year, decade after decade, is to stop—S.T.O.P.—electing Republicans. Period. There is no such thing as a "pro-choice Republican," and everyone voting for a Republican, for everything from dogcatcher to school board member to mayor to street sweeper, needs to recognize that this is their agenda in a nutshell. That's it, that's all.
I haven't been a Republican since Nixon, and have no plans to ever vote Republican in my lifetime. Single issue voter? You bet. Because this is the only issue. If I don't have control over my body, I have zip.
Yeah, well, sure, but it won't. Republican-led legislatures will continue to waste our time and our money introducing similarly unconstitutional bills, which will pass, be signed into law, and then legally challenged.
The only way to avoid this scenario from continuing to play out in state after state, year after year, decade after decade, is to stop—S.T.O.P.—electing Republicans. Period. There is no such thing as a "pro-choice Republican," and everyone voting for a Republican, for everything from dogcatcher to school board member to mayor to street sweeper, needs to recognize that this is their agenda in a nutshell. That's it, that's all.
I haven't been a Republican since Nixon, and have no plans to ever vote Republican in my lifetime. Single issue voter? You bet. Because this is the only issue. If I don't have control over my body, I have zip.
28
Agreed. If I don't control my body, then I am a slave. I absolutely will not be a slave. Thus, I will be willing to kill anybody who tries to make me one. Be warned.
4
When has Alito ever considered the practical results of his opinions on real people? Whenever you think of the phrase "pedantic morosoph", think Alito.
13
I don't think I have EVER thought of the phrase "pedantic morosoph", so I used the dictionary. This is the meaning that I came up with - "an unimaginative, learned fool".
6
Yes, this is a win.
We won Roe v. Wade in the early 70's and have been under attack since.
We won civil rights legislation in the 60's and have been fighting an uphill battle ever since.
We won the right for same sex couples to marry and still we have states that do not recognize the right of 2 consenting adults to love and express that love in a marital union - that right is still under attack.
We are fighting for the rights of the Trans-gendered community - the attacks are on in full force.
The attacks will not stop. Women and men will continue to stand up for what they believe in and will fight for all they hold dear.
Fear generates the anger among Christians - they are no longer in control of society, so they attack the people and groups they are trained to hate for reasons they do not understand and in the name of a God who only wants to give love if they'd only open their hearts.
We won Roe v. Wade in the early 70's and have been under attack since.
We won civil rights legislation in the 60's and have been fighting an uphill battle ever since.
We won the right for same sex couples to marry and still we have states that do not recognize the right of 2 consenting adults to love and express that love in a marital union - that right is still under attack.
We are fighting for the rights of the Trans-gendered community - the attacks are on in full force.
The attacks will not stop. Women and men will continue to stand up for what they believe in and will fight for all they hold dear.
Fear generates the anger among Christians - they are no longer in control of society, so they attack the people and groups they are trained to hate for reasons they do not understand and in the name of a God who only wants to give love if they'd only open their hearts.
9
That the decision was NOT unanimous speaks to the judicial activism of the dissenters, and their disdain for the concept of stare decisis. What about SB5 is not an "undue burden?"
8
For those who don't know "stare decisis" is "the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent".
2
The irony here is that so-called women's advocacy groups are praising a decision that holds abortion centers to a lower standard of care than ambulatory surgery centers. Why? Why would abortion rights advocates be happy that the law will now allow women to have medical and surgical procedures done in facilities that they would not be allowed to have a colonoscopy, a heart cath or a minor surgery in.
It is this type of thinking that exposes the dark underside of abortion advocacy. It will gladly accept lower standards of health care in order to protect the right to abort a fetus for the sake of convenience. This is an ideology that deplores the rights of all but the healthy adult.
It is this type of thinking that exposes the dark underside of abortion advocacy. It will gladly accept lower standards of health care in order to protect the right to abort a fetus for the sake of convenience. This is an ideology that deplores the rights of all but the healthy adult.
1
George, abortions have been safely performed in these facilities since the 1970s, and as stated, many women give birth at home. The AMA and the American College of Gynecologists and Obstetrics have filed amici briefs in this case stating that this is a safe procedure as is.
These laws do nothing to protect women's health at all. They dishonestly close women's health clinics that provide more than abortions. They provide other health services at low cost that are vital to women living in poverty or of otherwise little means. These legislatures know that but disregarded it. They don't care about anything but wasting taxpayer money and putting the lives of women at risk when they pass these unconstitutional laws and they know it.
These laws do nothing to protect women's health at all. They dishonestly close women's health clinics that provide more than abortions. They provide other health services at low cost that are vital to women living in poverty or of otherwise little means. These legislatures know that but disregarded it. They don't care about anything but wasting taxpayer money and putting the lives of women at risk when they pass these unconstitutional laws and they know it.
7
"It is this type of thinking that exposes the dark underside of abortion advocacy. It will gladly accept lower standards of health care in order to protect the right to abort a fetus for the sake of convenience."
If the current standard of care were not adequate there would be statistics to back that up and there are NOT. Some clinics just hand out pills, but they were not exempted from the Texas requirement that women's clinics be ambulatory surgery centers.
Your "for the sake of convenience" comment is insulting. Most women agonize over the decision to abort. Their reasons are private and personal. No one (especially men) have to right to question a woman's right to control her body and her life.
If the current standard of care were not adequate there would be statistics to back that up and there are NOT. Some clinics just hand out pills, but they were not exempted from the Texas requirement that women's clinics be ambulatory surgery centers.
Your "for the sake of convenience" comment is insulting. Most women agonize over the decision to abort. Their reasons are private and personal. No one (especially men) have to right to question a woman's right to control her body and her life.
11
Now can we please use the same logic toward overturning Republican enacted voter ID laws which were necessary to preventing voter fraud (although of course no evidence of fraud is ever provided).
15
Congratulations to the women of North America for this latest victory, hopefully putting to rest the systematic encroachment on women's constitutional rights in the United States.
The US Supreme Court first gave constitutional sanction to a woman's right to choose in 1973. Yet the battle to overturn the Court's decision and to systematically restrict women's reproductive rights has been waged ever since by patriarchal and misogynistic politicians and their allies who simply refuse to respect women's autonomy.
We in Latin America, where the Catholic Church is still a dominant political actor, have many fewer rights when it comes to reproductive issues, though we have made some progress. Here North American and European women have blazed a formidable trail for us to follow.
The fact that today there are three women on the US Supreme Court has certainly helped. This too is the product of a strong and powerful women's movement that has forcefully challenged paternalistic and patronizing attitudes and laws for over a generation. In these areas, we salute you. The foresight, audacity and courage of the US women's movement is model for women activists all over the world.
The US Supreme Court first gave constitutional sanction to a woman's right to choose in 1973. Yet the battle to overturn the Court's decision and to systematically restrict women's reproductive rights has been waged ever since by patriarchal and misogynistic politicians and their allies who simply refuse to respect women's autonomy.
We in Latin America, where the Catholic Church is still a dominant political actor, have many fewer rights when it comes to reproductive issues, though we have made some progress. Here North American and European women have blazed a formidable trail for us to follow.
The fact that today there are three women on the US Supreme Court has certainly helped. This too is the product of a strong and powerful women's movement that has forcefully challenged paternalistic and patronizing attitudes and laws for over a generation. In these areas, we salute you. The foresight, audacity and courage of the US women's movement is model for women activists all over the world.
11
Justice Kennedy can be sensible from time to time.
5
Increasingly Republicans can't win on the merits, so they use dishonest tactics to force their will on the majority who disagree with them. Besides these blatantly insincere "protect the women" abortion laws, other examples are the use of gerrymandering and voter suppression to win elections.
20
Is our constitution becoming like a religion subject to interpretations? It seems the Supreme Court decisions are based on whether the judge is conservative, superconservative, liberal or superliberal. Our life decisions are made by 8 judges.
Luckily in this case it the decision makes common sense
Luckily in this case it the decision makes common sense
5
Those Uterus-Free Americans (UFAs) who would appoint themselves Keepers of the Mechanism have always had a logical and moral flaw -- they should not be in a position to impose their morality upon others. This Texas case is an excellent example of why that is: while I am sure these UFAs are convinced their only motivation is that they are pro-life and therefore have God on their side, the reality is they put women, often already mothers, at risk with their heedless tactics and multilayered lies. They did not care.
I have a controversial opinion that gets me into arguments all the time in Texas. If it is decided that someone other than the mother has the right to decided what life is and what that mother should be allowed to do with the child, then everyone is at risk. Why? All that needs to happen is a redefinition of "life." The unborn? Only the ambulatory? Only the cognizant? Imagine there is a massive environmental crisis wherein suddenly it is questionable whether we can feed the current population of this country or this earth? The UFAs who claim the right to decided what life is may decided it is something other than a mother would be willing to accept. Or, much more likely, what if the UFA-ers keep the strict pro-life standard here in the US but decided upon more coercive policies in places where massive famine is imminent?
The principle is not "We are right because we are pro-life." The principle is that only the person with the uterus gets to decide.
I have a controversial opinion that gets me into arguments all the time in Texas. If it is decided that someone other than the mother has the right to decided what life is and what that mother should be allowed to do with the child, then everyone is at risk. Why? All that needs to happen is a redefinition of "life." The unborn? Only the ambulatory? Only the cognizant? Imagine there is a massive environmental crisis wherein suddenly it is questionable whether we can feed the current population of this country or this earth? The UFAs who claim the right to decided what life is may decided it is something other than a mother would be willing to accept. Or, much more likely, what if the UFA-ers keep the strict pro-life standard here in the US but decided upon more coercive policies in places where massive famine is imminent?
The principle is not "We are right because we are pro-life." The principle is that only the person with the uterus gets to decide.
9
I think it is time to seriously consider beginning impeachment proceedings against Justices Alito and Thomas. Time after time they have written opinions that defy the facts and logic. Today's is a good example of Justice Alito proposing outrageous arguments to support political extralegal goals. Ledbetter v. Goodyear is another.
Justice Thomas is even worse. I invite readers to look at Brumfield v. McCain in which a large part of Thomas's opinion is spent discussing the victim's son's career in the NFL which has absolutely no bearing on the case. Or his dissent in Obergefell v Hodges in which he ignores all the precedents and instead repeatedly refers to the Declaration of Independence which is neither part of the Constitution nor a law. But the worst one I have read is his opinion in Connick v. Thompson in which he totally gets the facts of the case wrong. I again invite the reader to read Thomas's opinion and Ginsburg's savage dissent. See if you think Thomas is competent in any sense.
Justice Thomas is even worse. I invite readers to look at Brumfield v. McCain in which a large part of Thomas's opinion is spent discussing the victim's son's career in the NFL which has absolutely no bearing on the case. Or his dissent in Obergefell v Hodges in which he ignores all the precedents and instead repeatedly refers to the Declaration of Independence which is neither part of the Constitution nor a law. But the worst one I have read is his opinion in Connick v. Thompson in which he totally gets the facts of the case wrong. I again invite the reader to read Thomas's opinion and Ginsburg's savage dissent. See if you think Thomas is competent in any sense.
55
Thomas is not competent in any sense of the word. And now that his puppet master, Scalia, is gone, he is even worse.
7
If these extremists gave 1/1000% of the effort to control the unchecked flow of guns being sold to anyone with a pulse in the Lone Star state, the public would be much better off.
16
The intellectual dishonesty of Alito, Roberts and Thomas is shameful; their pathetic support for the patently phony Texas law is a travesty, and a black mark on the Court's reputation.
25
The creepy GOP "ideal world" that Rick Perry was aiming for is one where men control women and assign them some kind of second rate citizen status, imposing their fundamentalist views upon total strangers. Thank goodness for the Law.
The Supreme Court is reason enough to vote for every woman in America to vote next election.
The Supreme Court is reason enough to vote for every woman in America to vote next election.
12
5-3 is good enough. Those who have been bullying women have been vanquished -- for now.
9
As for Rick Perry's "ideal world" in which there was no abortion: having no need for abortion would be ideal, but in reality, we are talking about either joining him in keeping our collective heads in the sand while women seek illegal, unsafe abortions, or one in which elected leaders uphold their responsibilities to citizens and to upholding the law of the land.
9
If Texans don't need evidence for what they want in their textbooks, or about climate science, or about evolution, why would they depend on evidence for their arguments to limit abortion?
It must be a strange place to live, where residents go along believing something and acting as if is true, then suddenly, and probably often unexpectedly, bumping into reality and being confused why reality is different than what they were led to believe.
It must be a strange place to live, where residents go along believing something and acting as if is true, then suddenly, and probably often unexpectedly, bumping into reality and being confused why reality is different than what they were led to believe.
14
Clearly a victory for rational thinking. Perhaps the Court can apply the same analytical process to address attempts by the same set of characters who have made it more and more difficult to exercise the constitutional right to vote.
13
And as Republican Legislators and Governors proceed, nationwide, to pass laws written around women's bodies, we need this highest court to ensure that our Constitutional rights are protected, regardless of any state lines.
10
A major victory for human rights!
7
It was either time for the U.S. Supreme Court to defend Roe or to signal that it was effectively dead. This ruling has added bite because it would have survived even if Antonin Scalia had not died on Feb. 13th. Hooray for the Court, that has put off at least for a time the religious war that was forming in our own country for years; and hooray for Anthony Kennedy.
It's not over, of course. The latest are the efforts to redefine "viability", the benchmark originally set by the Court in Roe. Religious conservatives will argue that our knowledge today is vastly more extensive than it was in 1973, when Roe was decided; and that fetuses are viable far closer to conception than the third trimester originally established by the Court, at which point the state could regulate or prohibit abortions. Expect to see new state laws testing the forbearance of this Court yet again.
It's not over, of course. The latest are the efforts to redefine "viability", the benchmark originally set by the Court in Roe. Religious conservatives will argue that our knowledge today is vastly more extensive than it was in 1973, when Roe was decided; and that fetuses are viable far closer to conception than the third trimester originally established by the Court, at which point the state could regulate or prohibit abortions. Expect to see new state laws testing the forbearance of this Court yet again.
37
I watched the video and saw an anti-choice woman screaming that people will die if they go to an abortion clinic that doesn't have admitting privileges or swinging doors wide enough for a gurney to pass through. Statistically a person is in more danger having a wisdom tooth pulled. Yes, you are more likely to die from dental work than from an abortion. Yet, I see no protesters outside of dental clinics demanding wider hallways and bigger elevators so they meet hospital standards. I see no legislator demanding hospital admitting privileges for dentists. If legislators are really only concerned with women's health, why aren't they demanding wider doors in dentists' offices?
230
"I watched the video and saw an anti-choice..."
You say one side is "anti-choice" while they call themselves "pro-life". If you're going to call yourself "pro-choice", can the other say just as easily call you "anti-life"?
You say one side is "anti-choice" while they call themselves "pro-life". If you're going to call yourself "pro-choice", can the other say just as easily call you "anti-life"?
No.
3
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote:
“We add that, when directly asked at oral argument whether Texas knew of a single instance in which the new requirement would have helped even one woman obtain better treatment, Texas admitted that there was no evidence in the record of such a case.”
Texas couldn't demonstrate a single case where their oppressive law would have made a positive difference.
It was one more very harmful right-wing political fraud, charade and propaganda piece by the Grand Uterine Party and their creepy pastors to control women's bodies and punish them for sex while scamming for votes.
Can anyone demonstrate a single case where any Republican ideas have made a positive difference ?
No, really.
It's difficult not conclude that the entire Republican Party platform is a well-orchestrated fraud.
America finally enters the 21st century as its 4th century right-wing Christian soldiers mercifully stumble off America's political stage.
Have fun in church, zealots.
“We add that, when directly asked at oral argument whether Texas knew of a single instance in which the new requirement would have helped even one woman obtain better treatment, Texas admitted that there was no evidence in the record of such a case.”
Texas couldn't demonstrate a single case where their oppressive law would have made a positive difference.
It was one more very harmful right-wing political fraud, charade and propaganda piece by the Grand Uterine Party and their creepy pastors to control women's bodies and punish them for sex while scamming for votes.
Can anyone demonstrate a single case where any Republican ideas have made a positive difference ?
No, really.
It's difficult not conclude that the entire Republican Party platform is a well-orchestrated fraud.
America finally enters the 21st century as its 4th century right-wing Christian soldiers mercifully stumble off America's political stage.
Have fun in church, zealots.
366
Yet when liberals propose "common sense" gun laws that they acknowledge would not have stopped whatever massacre they're disingenuously claiming is the justification for the law, or would not have reduced crime at all in the abstract, that's perfectly okay, right?
Same thing with voter ID. Asked to provide any evidence that systemic fraud exists, they cannot and have even said so under oath (PA). Yet still they insist on restrictive ID laws supposedly to protect against it. The real reason is blatantly clear.
7
Why restate the editorial's points? Other than calling names, you don't add anything.
A spiteful act nicely rebutted,
The specious claims clearly tut tutted,
And the crude bigotry
Thwarted judiciously.
Mau other such laws be so gutted.
The specious claims clearly tut tutted,
And the crude bigotry
Thwarted judiciously.
Mau other such laws be so gutted.
130
may for may
13
We forgive you Larry.
These poems are trite.
1
Hoisted on their own petard. YES!
66
This is not a victory for "abortion" rights. It is a victory for a Woman's Right to Choose What She Does With Her Own Body and Life and for Family Planning.
We must remain vigilant. An articles in today's Reuters says, "The Supreme Court has appeals pending in two cases involving admitting privilege laws in Mississippi and Wisconsin on which it could act as soon as Tuesday." We must be vigilant. It would not be the first time the male, catholic justices patted us on the back with one hand and knifed us in the back with the other.
This is why it is so important that we:
Pass The Equal Rights Amendment to our United States Constitution so that NO law may be passed that attacks a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.
Demand that Congress repeal the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act" that allowed religious organizations and radical religionists to interfere with our personal lives.
Demand that Congress repeal the Hyde Amendments that disallow any federal money from being used for abortion and pays attorneys fees for religious organizations to sue US.
It is time to stop these attacks on over one-half of Americans - women - NOW!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment
We must remain vigilant. An articles in today's Reuters says, "The Supreme Court has appeals pending in two cases involving admitting privilege laws in Mississippi and Wisconsin on which it could act as soon as Tuesday." We must be vigilant. It would not be the first time the male, catholic justices patted us on the back with one hand and knifed us in the back with the other.
This is why it is so important that we:
Pass The Equal Rights Amendment to our United States Constitution so that NO law may be passed that attacks a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.
Demand that Congress repeal the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act" that allowed religious organizations and radical religionists to interfere with our personal lives.
Demand that Congress repeal the Hyde Amendments that disallow any federal money from being used for abortion and pays attorneys fees for religious organizations to sue US.
It is time to stop these attacks on over one-half of Americans - women - NOW!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment
379
While everyone has an undeniable right to determine what to do with their own body, a right which must be tolerated by even those who disagree, they cannot expect others to fund those rights.
1
No it isn't a victory for a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body.
The woman still has to abide by the obamacare healthcare mandates.
She cannot become a sex worker.
She cannot drink alcohol with her friends until she is 21 (but can have an abortion or the morning after pill )
She can't have her kids eat whatever she wants to feel them in school.
Said the illusionist to the crowd..."Watch this hand, over this way......"
The woman still has to abide by the obamacare healthcare mandates.
She cannot become a sex worker.
She cannot drink alcohol with her friends until she is 21 (but can have an abortion or the morning after pill )
She can't have her kids eat whatever she wants to feel them in school.
Said the illusionist to the crowd..."Watch this hand, over this way......"
"Pass The Equal Rights Amendment to our United States Constitution so that NO law may be passed that attacks a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body."
If you're so concerned about the right to choose, will you defend the right of a photographer to choose not to photograph a gay wedding?
If you're so concerned about the right to choose, will you defend the right of a photographer to choose not to photograph a gay wedding?
PBS recently aired a documentary about this very issue. It showed that many clinics have already closed the the few left were hanging on a thread. These clinics have been injured by this unjust law and deserve compensation. How about a lawsuit against the State of Texas to recapitalize and restart the closed clinics, compensate the women that have been injured or forced to travel many hundreds of miles and the loss of many jobs in the clinics. Significant damage has already occurred because of this horrible law. Why not make them pay for it. Let's give the law's authors the chance to prove their arguments in a civil trial. If there is no penalty for hurting people for years on end, they will just do it again as soon as they get the chance.
490
Mr. Rozenblit, I agree with your sentiment. However, it was legal at the time because Texas lawmakers passed it. It would be better if we each sent a few dollars to Planned Parenthood in Texas to help them reopen clinics. We can't turn back the clock and I, for one, am SICK of all of OUR money being wasted on these lawsuits and enriching lawyers. The 1997 Hyde Amendment put WE taxpayers on the hook to pay for "religious organizations" court costs - win or lose. Enough.
193
Here here njglea!
5
I am of the opinion that when, as here, a legislature chooses to pass a law that is clearly intended to thwart a Constitutional protection, as soon as the law passes, its implementation should be suspended until the question of the Constitutionality of the provision has been decided by the court of last resort (i.e. the US Supreme Court). I think that it would take ALL the fun out of this kind of maneuvering by politicians who do this stuff to get their photo ops/publicity, but who have absolutely no understanding of the medical realities of that for which they are advocating. They certainly don't care about the economic realities. If we remain with the present system, then we need to require any legislation of this type to include funding for job relocation/retraining, extended unemployment benefits, etc. for those displaced by such idiocy. If it takes reworking, or even ditching, the 1977 Hyde Amendment, then so be it - let those who sow the discord, reap the costs of their attacks on the Constitutional rights of others.
10
A right and necessary decision, about which I am thankful and elated.
253
I, too, am thankful and elated. And as always, Justice Thomas is on the wrong side - oh don't get me started.
6
Me, too. I'll be even more elated if the stupid people in my state ever find the cohones to vote out these liars and frauds.
3
The Texas laws restricting access to abortions were nothing more than cynical ploys to prevent women from exercising their rights to legal abortions. The fact that Alito, Roberts and Thomas voted in favor of these punitive laws demonstrates that there is a battle still to be fought against ideologues who will put Christian zealotry and conservative paternalism before common sense and reason. I hope all similar laws now fall like dominoes, and women are able to get access to abortions no matter which states they happen to live in.
The upcoming presidential election could not be more important, because the future of the court will determine the kind of future in which we all will live for years to come.
The upcoming presidential election could not be more important, because the future of the court will determine the kind of future in which we all will live for years to come.
669
In fact, gemli, "there is a battle still to be fought against" judges sworn to uphold the law who are such hypocritical ideologues that they "will put Christian zealotry and conservative paternalism before" the clear law of the land.
21
Yes, of course. And the Senate! We have to get back the Senate. I’m a 63 year old white male and if it was a coin flip, I’d rather have the Senate than the White House. Where do all those Supreme Court Justices get confirmed… or not! Despicable scum!
4
for decades to come!!!
3