The national abortion battle lines are shifting. The Supreme Court is expected to arbitrate on a challenge to a pro-life Mississippi law in June. Coupled with the facts that 1) the court has a conservative leaning majority for the first time since before 1973 and 2) it has let the Texas abortion ban stand, many,
On July 14 a Maryland Federal District Judge moved to nullify FDA safety restrictions on chemical abortion requiring physician supervision. The judge argued this requirement is a substantial obstacle for women during a pandemic. Removing doctors from chemical abortion administration allows drugs to be mailed to women directly. The FDA appealed the ruling and defended
(This is part 5 of a 5 part series on The Supreme Court, Abortion, and American Morality. Check out part 1, part 2, part 3, and part 4) If the recent abortion case (Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt) at the Supreme Court has clarified anything, it is that the Court’s majority has gone ‘off the rails’
(This is part 4 of a 5 part series on The Supreme Court, Abortion, and American Morality. Check out part 1, part 2, and part 3) The Supreme Court’s majority has been consistently ignoring all notions of traditional Constitutional law in several recent cases. As Chief Justice Roberts notes, “The Court today not only overlooks our
(This is part 3 of a 5 part series on The Supreme Court, Abortion, and American Morality. Check out part 1 and part 2) I have been wrestling with the Court’s latest abortion ruling all last week (Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt) lamenting the knowledge that the ruling carries with it the very real danger
Not too long ago the Supreme Court was asked by abortionists to hear a case about a State law regulating the abortion industry in Texas. Surprisingly they agreed. While it is dumbfounding that the common sense provisions in the law were ham-handedly cast aside as unconstitutional by the Court’s majority that is not what is
Five important conclusions can be drawn from the recent abortion ruling, Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt, released Monday June 27, 2016. First, contrary to Justice Thomas’ dissent, the Supreme Court’s majority is highly predictable. They decide cases based upon a new ‘bedrock’ principle of the shifting sands of individual autonomy. Whatever will be seen by the
America changed. What we used to celebrate on the 4th of July is the inception of a government by the people and for the people, citizens of equal value under God as ensured by the rule of law – the Constitution. For the first time since the Dred Scott v. Sandford case fueling a Civil
