Supreme Court Strikes Down Law That Would Reduce Abortion Access In LA

jerzeegirl (FL zone 9B)(9b)

Chief Justice Roberts sides with the liberals 5-4 decision. Yay!

SaveComment39Like4
Comments (39)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maifleur03

Good

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dublinbay z6 (KS)

Hurray!

The story is still breaking, but here is the info. we have at this moment:

------------------------

"John Roberts sides with liberals on Supreme Court to block controversial Louisiana abortion law

"Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the liberal justices on the Supreme Court on Monday to block a controversial Louisiana abortion law that critics said would have closed nearly every clinic in the state.

The 5-4 ruling is a win for supporters of abortion rights who argued that the law was not medically necessary and amounted to a veiled attempt to restrict abortion.

The majorityopinion was penned by Justice Stephen Breyer, who wrote that the majority "consequently hold that the Louisiana statute is unconstitutional."

He added later: "The evidence also shows that opposition to abortion played a significant role in some hospitals' decisions to deny admitting privileges."

The ruling continues a trend of Roberts siding with liberals in major cases. He previously hasupheld the program allowing undocumented immigrants who came into the US as children to remain and sided with opinion that extended anti-discrimination protections to LGBTQ workers."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/29/politics/abortion-louisiana-law-blocked-supreme-court/index.html

-------------------------

That last paragraph highlights a second reason why this decision is so important. Looks like Trump has not succeeded in packing the high court with conservatives who will blindly support his will! Justice Roberts was always considered a conservative, but with the court leaning to the right (because of Trump's appointments), Roberts seems to be swinging it back to the middle by Roberts leaning left on social issues.

It has happened before that a conservative judge, with time, becomes more liberal--thankfully.

Kate

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nana H

I said a few times over the last year that the judge to watch is Roberts. I think he can now definitely be called the " swing vote ".

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

Good news! Forty-seven years after the decision in Roe vs. Wade was handed down, it is encouraging to see Chief Justice Roberts, who will be on the court for a long time, voting with the 4 liberal justices to strike down a state law which would have made it unreasonably hard for a woman in Louisiana to obtain an abortion.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dandyfopp

Very good news.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Olychick

Yes! I am so, so happy about this. Although our state has abortion protected by law regardless of what the SCOTUS does (at least for now), I am so happy for the women whose lives and bodies and choices will be protected by this ruling.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dublinbay z6 (KS)

CNN has an UPDATE:

----------------

"Four years ago, when Justice Anthony Kennedy was still on the bench, the court struck down a similar law out of Texas.

Much has changed since then, however, as Kennedy has been replaced by Brett Kavanaugh, who is considered more conservative on the issue. Supporters of abortion rights feared not only that recent precedent would be in jeopardy, but that the strengthened conservative majority might begin to chip away at landmark opinions like Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld a woman's right to have an abortion.

Roberts wrote a separate concurring opinion also citing the Texas law.

"The Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore Louisiana's law cannot stand under our precedents," the chief justice wrote.

[. . .]

But while Roberts upheld the law, in a concurring opinion the chief justice left open the door that other states might be able to pursue similar restrictions.

In a footnote, he said that the "validity of admitting privileges law depends on numerous factors that may differ from state to state."

CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law Stephen Vladeck said that Roberts suggested that he did not necessarily endorse the analysis of the 2016 decision, which focused as much on whether the restrictions actually provided benefits to pregnant women as on whether they imposed an undue burden.

"In the process, Vladeck said, "the chief justice's narrower opinion implies that states making different arguments in different cases might be able to justify similar restrictions going forward. In that respect, the chief justice may have sided with abortion supporters today, but their victory may be short-lived."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/29/politics/abortion-louisiana-law-blocked-supreme-court/index.html

------------------

Here we go again! At least there is a space for a temporary breather as the lawyers search for wiggle-room within this new ruling.

Kate

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Congratulations to the women of Louisiana!

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dublinbay z6 (KS)

Just now on TV:

WH issued a statement to the effect that it was unfortunate that the court is becoming political and not concerned about women's health/welfare.

As though the anti-choicers were never political?

Kate

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Olychick

WH statement - they should have choked when saying that. AS IF!

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

Stan, I don't understand?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
paprikash

Somehow celebrating death seems inappropriate to me.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW

It will actually save the lives of women too desperate and too poor to travel to another state. In case you don't remember, paprikash, women died in botched abortions before it became legal.

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Olychick

Yes, the right wing seems bent on celebrating the death and maiming of women who can't access safe and legal abortion. Seems wrong of them.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
batyabeth

" it was unfortunate that the court is becoming political"

snort.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
heri_cles

Roberts has become a valuable swing man.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
arcy_gw

All this BLM, COVID -19 save the people rhetoric and here you are celebrating the freedom to kill completely innocent human lives. How do you not see the insanity in that? This ruling puts the mom's lives at risk period end of discussion. But that really isn't what ya'll care about is it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW

I absolutely care about the woman. She is an actual, breathing life that is capable of making decisions for herself. And access to safe abortion saves women's lives.

I value the woman's life above an 8-week old bundle of cells and I respect her decision to make medical decisions for herself.

8 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

If only we could have a period and an end of discussion about a woman's right to choose after 47 years!

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vedabeeps

“This ruling puts the mom's lives at risk period end of discussion. But that really isn't what ya'll care about is it.“


If the right really wanted to do something about lowering abortion numbers and support Moms they would support education for all, healthcare for all and a living wage. But that isn’t really what ya’ll care about is it?

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Stan, if a woman has an abortion in a hospital they are able to be treated for complications. Not so with back alley doctors. You are arguing a false premise. That is one reason abortions should be legal and decided between a woman and her doctor not men who play political games.

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

I find it sad that oral surgeons are required to have hospital admitting privileges before they work on a person's mouth, but entering a woman's reproductive organs to remove human life does not require hospital privileges for the doctor.

So, we value the patient when it's their mouth, but we don't value the patient when we're killing human life and the mother could bleed to death.

I am not sure how hospital privileges work in the US but why would that matter? If the woman needs to be transferred to a hospital are the doctors there not able to handle the situation competently? Some of our doctors locally do not treat the patient once the person is admitted they hand it over to those within the hospital.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Prohibiting or seriously impeding a woman from carrying out her own legal health decisions is simply wrong.

Using the wrong definition of "baby" to support impeding women's access to health care is inflammatory and full of hate.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

Kathy:

Stan, if a woman has an abortion in a hospital they are able to be treated for complications. Not so with back alley doctors. You are arguing a false premise. That is one reason abortions should be legal and decided between a woman and her doctor not men who play political games.


Apparently you didn't bother to read my post, or comprehend it, or you wouldn't have made that post.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

ziemia:

Prohibiting or seriously impeding a woman from carrying out her own legal health decisions is simply wrong.

Using the wrong definition of "baby" to support impeding women's access to health care is inflammatory and full of hate.


Well be sure to tell every daughter, daughter in law, granddaughter, granddaughter in law not to EVER USE THE WORD BABY when they announce they are pregnant, never refer to the HUMAN LIFE as a "baby" until it's born and we're sure a doctor isn't there to snuff out the life and finish it off, and to NEVER share a sonogram with a "baby" in it.

I'll tell you what's inflammatory and full of hate--ABORTION.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chisue

Opinion pieces on Roberts emphasize that he is a 'lawyer's lawyer'. He has said his decision in this case stemmed from the fact that courts have already decided this abortion rights issue -- not that he agreed with the decision or how it was made, but that we must have consistency in the law.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Stan, you sure do conflate things. And you are clumping a whole lot of women together because it meets your perspective.

Once a fetus becomes a welcome part of a woman's life, she starts anticipating her baby. World Of Difference.

Context

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

It's either a baby or it's not.

Make up your mind.

You don't celebrate a human life as a "baby" coming, sharing sonograms and selecting names because it's welcome one time, and dismiss it as insignificant tissue to be sucked out or torn apart and put down a drain when that human life is not wanted.

How convenient.

No one is fooling anyone about that--certainly not the souls of those babies, which I hope are lined up waiting to meet their parents when they leave this world.

Some will be glad for a reunion--people that regret their decision, or that they felt they had to do it and/or didn't understand the science and facts--others that do it wholesale and did not understand, or don't care--might be surprised.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

The bill was written by a democrat and signed into law by a democrat. lol

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

"It's either a baby or it's not."

Nope. Repeating does not make it so nor does it make it a less hateful statement.

Context.....

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dublinbay z6 (KS)

Ziemia has it right.

"Once a fetus becomes a welcome part of a woman's life, she starts anticipating her baby. World Of Difference.

Context"

----

Kate

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

Context, no. It's the same life, and a woman welcoming it or rejecting it for whatever reason doesn't change the scientific fact of what that human life is at any given time.

It's CONVENIENCE.

I realize that fact is in and of itself, quite INCONVENIENT FOR SOME.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dublinbay z6 (KS)

"A fetus or foetus (/ˈfiːtəs/; plural fetuses, feti, foetuses, or foeti) is the unborn offspring of an animal that develops from an embryo.[1] Following embryonic development the fetal stage of development takes place. In human prenatal development, fetal development begins from the ninth week after fertilisation (or eleventh week gestational age) and continues until birth."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus


"Baby can be used to refer to any child from birth to age 4 years old, thus encompassing newborns, infants, and toddlers."

https://www.verywellfamily.com/difference-between-baby-newborn-infant-toddler-293848

Kate

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

When a pregnant woman has an accident, she screams, "MY BABY! Not "My fetus".

If a scientist found an embryo on another planet, s/he would be screaming, "LIFE ON ANOTHER PLANET!

Scott Peterson? Killed his "fetus" and was charged for taking a "LIFE".

Too easy.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW

Frankly, I don't give two cents about what a MAN thinks a woman should do with her body and what's going on inside her body.

See ya.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

Yea, well he's the father.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW

Of course I respect a couple's choice to make a mutual decision if they are in a relationship. I'm talking about random men pontificating about what women should do.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dublinbay z6 (KS)

The courts have made it clear that an abortion doctor performing an abortion on a pregnant woman is NOT to be equated with acts like husbands murdering their wives and thus causing the death of the fetus she was carrying or a drunken driver causing a bad car accident that causes the death of a fetus.

In the first case (abortion), the act is LEGAL. In the second two examples, the actions are ILLEGAL.

Judges have explicitly stated that considering the fetuses in the last two examples as "persons" applies only to those cases and cannot be extrapolated to claim that the fetus in an abortion is the same as a murdered person.

You have no legal leg to stand on, Stan.

Kate

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nana H

"It's CONVENIENCE.
I realize that fact is in and of itself, quite INCONVENIENT FOR SOME"

My heart goes out to any woman reading this that for any reason faced and made this difficult choice...and I know there are some.

For my part I will never judge anyone who has had to face and make difficult choices in this matter or other personal choice matters.

2 Likes Save    
Browse Gardening and Landscaping Stories on Houzz See all Stories
Remodeling Guides Design Workshop: Is an In-Law Unit Right for Your Property?
ADUs can alleviate suburban sprawl, add rental income for homeowners, create affordable housing and much more
Full Story
Life 'Not My Precious Books!' — Pain-Free Ways to Declutter Your Library
Have your books and neatness too, with these ideas for paring down and straightening up a beloved collection
Full Story
Most Popular 9 Real Ways You Can Help After a House Fire
Suggestions from someone who lost her home to fire — and experienced the staggering generosity of community
Full Story