Federal courts REPEALS another pro-life law

[JakeStarkey]

Reactionaries and libertarians continue to deny the clear intent of Article III and the colonial historical precedents for doctrine of judicial review.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

[
The states are subject to the Federal Constitution and its case law, as are the judges and justices of the Federal courts, and the officers of the many states – including those of Texas.

So how did the courts invent the "constitutional right to abortion". 170 years of case law said abortion is a state issue and yet in 1973, the courts ignored all that case law and made it a federal issue. Explain that.

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion, there is a Constitutional right to privacy, however; and that right to privacy is an inalienable right that manifests as a consequence of our humanity – it can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man. Our right to privacy predates the Constitution and the Republic.

In the context of the right to privacy, therefore, in accordance with the doctrine of substantive due process, a government that enacts a measure which places an undue burden upon a woman seeking an abortion violates her right to privacy:

If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.

Thomas S. EISENSTADT, Sheriff of Suffolk County, Massachusetts, Appellant, v. William R. BAIRD. | Supreme Court | LII / Legal Information Institute

Again, the issue before the court had nothing to do with when human life begins, it had to do with the fact that government is unfit to make that determination, and that government lacks the authority to dictate to citizens concerning matters indeed both personal and private.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Reactionaries and libertarians continue to deny the clear intent of Article III and the colonial historical precedents for doctrine of judicial review.

HAHAHA. The board notes you said "clear intent" and not "clear wording".

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion, there is a Constitutional right to privacy, however;.

HAHAHA. What a stupid thing to say. Where does the constitution say there is a right to privacy?

 

[National Socialist]

Welcome to America where we murder babies but try and save murderers from death row!

 

[WorldWatcher]

The board notes all you have is namecalling. Thanks for admitting i'm right.

Ironic, in a post PRIOR to the one you quoted there was this...

Hey stupid. It's called judicial tyranny and it's not only dumb, it's unconstitutional. THINK

So since you responded with name calling I guess that means you had nothing?



>>>>

 

[Katzndogz]

[

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion, there is a Constitutional right to privacy, however;.

HAHAHA. What a stupid thing to say. Where does the constitution say there is a right to privacy?

Noplace and the Supreme Court never found it a Constitutional right either. They said it was a penumbral right, not appearing in the Constitution.

 

[Dragonlady]

Welcome to America where we murder babies but try and save murderers from death row!

Those who believe that the state has the right to execute criminals are certainly not "pro-life" and cannot claim that they oppose abortion because murder is wrong.

 

[Sallow]

Repealing laws is a legislative function but UNELECTED judges do it all the time!!!

Texas abortion limits unconstitutional, federal judge says - POLITICO.com


10/29/13 10:31 AM EDT
A federal district court has ruled that one abortion restriction passed by the Texas state Legislature over the summer is unconstitutional and has partially blocked another.

District Judge Lee Yeakel has blocked the state from enforcing a requirement that abortion-providing doctors obtain admitting privileges at local hospitals — a restriction that would have ended abortion services at one-third of the health centers currently providing them. He also blocked restrictions on the use of medication abortion. Both restrictions would have gone into effect on Tuesday.

Planned Parenthood and more than a dozen other women’s health providers that filed the suit successfully demonstrated that the admitting privileges provision puts an “undue burden” on a woman seeking an abortion in Texas, as the provision creates a “substantial obstacle” to accessing such service, Yeakel wrote.

Welcome to America. It's called Judicial Review.

Why do you hate the United States Constitution?

 

[National Socialist]

Liberals are always trying to get death row inmates off death row but certainly have no problem sending babies to be murdered in abortion clinics.