At least there is ONE SANE SCOTUS judge....You don't have to be religious to know right from wrong.
Daily Caller ^ | June 28, 2019
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke out against dismemberment abortions Friday, saying that justices must confront the realities of what the Supreme Court “has wrought” through abortion rulings.
In a concurring opinion, Thomas spoke on an Alabama law against dismemberment abortion after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case on Friday. The justice said that it is “implausible” that the Constitution would protect the dismemberment of a living child. The case was Harris v. West Alabama Women’s Center.
Thomas described the dismemberment abortion process, saying that the more developed a child is, “the more likely an abortion will involve dismembering it.”
“The notion that anything in the Constitution prevents States from passing laws prohibiting the dismembering of a living child is implausible,” the Supreme Court Justice said.
But Thomas noted that under the “undue burden” standard, restrictions on abortion are unconstitutional if their purpose is to put an obstacle in the path of a woman who is seeking an abortion.
Thomas referenced Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey in which abortion providers persuaded lower courts that abortion options other than dismemberment abortions were too risky.
The Supreme Cou rt justice said that lower courts ruled that Alabama abortion laws “had the effect of burdening abortions even though it did not preventthem.”
Thomas said that this case serves “as a stark reminder that our abortion jurisprudence has spiraled out of control.”
“Although this case does not present the opportunity to address our demonstrably erroneous ‘undue burden’ standard, we cannot continue blinking the reality of what this Court has wrought,” Thomas said.
Daily Caller ^ | June 28, 2019
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke out against dismemberment abortions Friday, saying that justices must confront the realities of what the Supreme Court “has wrought” through abortion rulings.
In a concurring opinion, Thomas spoke on an Alabama law against dismemberment abortion after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case on Friday. The justice said that it is “implausible” that the Constitution would protect the dismemberment of a living child. The case was Harris v. West Alabama Women’s Center.
Thomas described the dismemberment abortion process, saying that the more developed a child is, “the more likely an abortion will involve dismembering it.”
“The notion that anything in the Constitution prevents States from passing laws prohibiting the dismembering of a living child is implausible,” the Supreme Court Justice said.
But Thomas noted that under the “undue burden” standard, restrictions on abortion are unconstitutional if their purpose is to put an obstacle in the path of a woman who is seeking an abortion.
Thomas referenced Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey in which abortion providers persuaded lower courts that abortion options other than dismemberment abortions were too risky.
The Supreme Cou rt justice said that lower courts ruled that Alabama abortion laws “had the effect of burdening abortions even though it did not preventthem.”
Thomas said that this case serves “as a stark reminder that our abortion jurisprudence has spiraled out of control.”
“Although this case does not present the opportunity to address our demonstrably erroneous ‘undue burden’ standard, we cannot continue blinking the reality of what this Court has wrought,” Thomas said.
