Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HipKat

Sotomayor pens scathing dissent of Texas abortion ban:

Recommended Posts

I can't believe the fake conservatives on here weren't all over this story after the supreme Court made its decision the other day.

"Justices have opted to bury their heads in the sand"

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a scathing dissent late Wednesday night over after the court's 5-4 decision to not halt Texas' abortion bill, blasting her colleagues for opting to "bury their heads in the sand" in regards to women's rights. 

 

The law, which took effect early Wednesday, is the most restrictive abortion measure in the country, as it bans abortions once a heartbeat is detected. Sotomayor said the bill is "clearly unconstitutional" based on its precedents. 

"This equates to a near-categorical ban on abortions beginning six weeks after a woman's last menstrual period, before many women realize they are pregnant, and months before fetal viability," Sotomayor wrote in her dissent. 

 

At six weeks of pregnancy, the embryo does not yet have a fully developed heart or blood vessels, and bones and muscles have not yet formed. It is not until the tenth week of pregnancy that an embryo is considered a fetus. It is not until around 24 weeks that a fetus has a chance of surviving outside the uterus.

Abortion rights groups had argued to the court that at least 85% of women who get abortions are at least six weeks pregnant, and that the bill will effectively prohibit all abortions and force many clinics to close.

Sotomayor said the court's failure to stop the bill is "stunning" and that it "rewards tactics designed to avoid judicial review." 

"Presented with an application to enjoin a flagrantly unconstitutional law engineered to prohibit women from exercising their constitutional rights and evade judicial scrutiny," Sotomayor wrote, "a majority of Justices have opted to bury their heads in the sand." 

 

Under the bill, private citizens will be able to file civil lawsuits against abortion providers or anyone who helps women get an abortion, including those who escort a woman to a clinic or help her pay for the procedure. If a plaintiff is successful in such a suit, they are entitled to at least $10,000, according to the bill.

"The Texas State Legislature has deputized the state's citizens as bounty hunters, offering them cash prizes for civilly prosecuting their neighbors' medical procedures," Sotomayor wrote, adding that the state made this decision because federal constitutional challenges to state laws are usually made against state officers in charge of those laws. 

Putting the onus on "citizen bounty hunters," she said, makes it more complicated for federal courts to get involved. 

"The state's gambit worked," Sotomayor wrote. "...It cannot be the case that a State can evade federal judicial scrutiny by outsourcing the enforcement of unconstitutional laws to its citizenry." 

"The Act is a breathtaking act of defiance — of the Constitution, of this Court's precedents, and of the rights of women seeking abortions throughout Texas," she continued. "The Court should not be so content to ignore its constitutional obligations to protect not only the rights of women, but also the sanctity of its precedents and of the rule of law."

 

 

 

 


“There he goes. One of God's own prototypes.

A high-powered mutant of some kind, never even considered for mass production.

Too weird to live, and too rare to die.”

 

Twitter: @HKTheResistance

 

HipKat, on *** other h***, is genuine, unapoli***tically nasty, and w**** his hea** on his ******. jc856

I’ll just forward them to Bridgett. comssvet11

Seek help. soflabillsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's finding it hard to kill people without Ruth Bader Ginsberg on the court. 

This.

This is Evil.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FanBack said:

She's finding it hard to kill people without Ruth Bader Ginsberg on the court. 

This.

This is Evil.

I don't have a problem with the law, since I'm pro-life but I do have a problem with anybody who feels like it filing a civil suit against anybody who they think may have had an abortion. That's the part that confuses the fuck out of me

  • Thanks 1

“There he goes. One of God's own prototypes.

A high-powered mutant of some kind, never even considered for mass production.

Too weird to live, and too rare to die.”

 

Twitter: @HKTheResistance

 

HipKat, on *** other h***, is genuine, unapoli***tically nasty, and w**** his hea** on his ******. jc856

I’ll just forward them to Bridgett. comssvet11

Seek help. soflabillsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HipKat said:

I don't have a problem with the law, since I'm pro-life but I do have a problem with anybody who feels like it filing a civil suit against anybody who they think may have had an abortion. That's the part that confuses the fuck out of me

I didn't like that either.  That's the kind of stuff I expect to see in a leftist cesspool, not in a place like Texas.  :niterider:

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HipKat said:

I don't have a problem with the law, since I'm pro-life but I do have a problem with anybody who feels like it filing a civil suit against anybody who they think may have had an abortion. That's the part that confuses the fuck out of me

So the right threw corrupt ATLA a bone.

Happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HipKat said:

I don't have a problem with the law, since I'm pro-life but I do have a problem with anybody who feels like it filing a civil suit against anybody who they think may have had an abortion. That's the part that confuses the fuck out of me

Good point 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again there's so much worry about what's going on up until birth and then it's a "you're on your own" once the child is born.  

I'd like to see the pro-life crowd put as much into supporting a child after birth as they do prior to birth.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, foster said:

Again there's so much worry about what's going on up until birth and then it's a "you're on your own" once the child is born.  

I'd like to see the pro-life crowd put as much into supporting a child after birth as they do prior to birth.

Ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but that's called "personal responsibility." Show me someone other than Mary who had a virgin birth and I'll consider paying for their kids. We also have a thing called "birth control" which will all together prevent pregnancy (free at Planned Parenthood) and if you're worried about that you can just choose to NOT have sex at all. Most abortions that occur aren't medically necessary and are only done due to selfish reasons. Now fuck off.

Right.  50% of this is on the woman involved, 50% on the male.  100% of this new law puts the burden on the woman and doesn't force any accountability on the father of the child.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but that's called "personal responsibility." Show me someone other than Mary who had a virgin birth and I'll consider paying for their kids. We also have a thing called "birth control" which will all together prevent pregnancy (free at Planned Parenthood) and if you're worried about that you can just choose to NOT have sex at all. Most abortions that occur aren't medically necessary and are only done due to selfish reasons. Now fuck off.

holy fuck is this a retarded MAGAT theory.  Lemmie get this straight, the stupidest among us should be punished with having more stupid people cause they did a stupid thing and so therefore fuck you, lets have the stupid people multiply?

I got that right?  Go fuck yourself idiot.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 212frawk said:

did you know that if a 12 year old is raped and becomes pregnant in Afghanistan, she must carry the baby to term?

Oh wait, my bad.

That's Texas. 

That’s not true. You have 6 weeks but most rape victims go to the hospital after being raped where they will give the morning after or EC while being checked out for dna. Besides that I posted before the percentage of abortions less than 1% is from rape and incest.  But I’m sure you already knew all this.


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 212frawk said:

holy fuck is this a retarded MAGAT theory.  Lemmie get this straight, the stupidest among us should be punished with having more stupid people cause they did a stupid thing and so therefore fuck you, lets have the stupid people multiply?

I got that right?  Go fuck yourself idiot.  

There is also adoption. A lot of women can’t have children or gay couples, there are many every day trying to adopt. 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 212frawk said:

holy fuck is this a retarded MAGAT theory.  Lemmie get this straight, the stupidest among us should be punished with having more stupid people cause they did a stupid thing and so therefore fuck you, lets have the stupid people multiply?

I got that right?  Go fuck yourself idiot.  

You need an attitude transplant...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 212frawk said:

holy fuck is this a retarded MAGAT theory.  Lemmie get this straight, the stupidest among us should be punished with having more stupid people cause they did a stupid thing and so therefore fuck you, lets have the stupid people multiply?

I got that right?  Go fuck yourself idiot.  

Problem here is you are assuming stupidity and then are using it as an excuse which actually makes you stupid for thinking that way, which is simply incorrect. The issue is that it's an irresponsibility or a I don't care attitude problem.

I'd venture to say that at least a solid 99% of people understand that the result of sex can be that the woman gets preggers...they just DGAF in most of those cases.

As usual you missed the mark because your simply much slower and less intelligent than most of the human population.

Chess is what we play against range leftist homos that have trouble playing checkers.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Thebowflexbody said:

An ounce of prevention.......

But it feels sooo good!  Hurr..durr?...

GiddyPlayfulCoati-size_restricted.gif


 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, foster said:

Right.  50% of this is on the woman involved, 50% on the male.  100% of this new law puts the burden on the woman and doesn't force any accountability on the father of the child.  

Possibly but have you considered that males have no reproductive rights? If a woman conceives on accident and the father does not want a child he has no ability to opt out of parenthood. Instead his pay will be garnished for 18+ years for a child he never intended to create and he may or may not have privileges to visit the child based on the temperament of the particular judge assigned in Family Court.


Sack "The Buffalo Range's TRUSTED News Source!"

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” ~ Dresden James

Parler @NYexile

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but that's called "personal responsibility." Show me someone other than Mary who had a virgin birth and I'll consider paying for their kids. We also have a thing called "birth control" which will all together prevent pregnancy (free at Planned Parenthood) and if you're worried about that you can just choose to NOT have sex at all. Most abortions that occur aren't medically necessary and are only done due to selfish reasons. Now fuck off.

What's wrong with selfish reasons? Govt is killing you and taking your  money for selfish reasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, thinwhiteduke said:

What's wrong with selfish reasons? Govt is killing you and taking your  money for selfish reasons

Understood but that doesn't make it morally correct.


Sack "The Buffalo Range's TRUSTED News Source!"

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” ~ Dresden James

Parler @NYexile

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...