5 Reasons Why the Supreme Court’s Latest Abortion Ruling is a Humiliating Defeat for Republicans
Read Time:22 Second
Without a doubt the big news of Monday was the Supreme Court, in a 5-3 ruling, striking down Texas’ highly restrictive anti-abortion laws. This was easily the biggest ruling on abortion in two decades, and it’s already being considered a landmark decision for women’s rights advocates. style=”display:inline-block;width:336px;height:280px” data-ad-client=”ca-pub-8278450341216875″ data-ad-slot=”8820921792″> To summarize, Texas Republicans knew that they…
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
Trumps statement that he would appoint justices that would “investigate judges” like the “Mexican” judge that was ruling against him is so scary that I cannot even fathom it. To think that he does not understand the function of the Court is just unfathomable. He also said they would have to pass a litmus test on abortion. I have doubts that they would ever get through the senate especially after the precedent set by the Republicans over Obama’s pending nominee.
I agree with each of the above points made, and would also like to point out that Justice Breyer unwittingly opened Pandora’s legal box, when he articulate his argument about res judicata. To clarify: res judicata prevents people from bring similar cases up to the Highest Court for repeated attempts for especially conservatives – who would hear cues from the late Justice Scalia as to what “he considers a valid argument which he would highly consider,” should it “be brought before the Court.” To further clarify: Conservatives – especially those of evangelical flair – enjoy pushing “test cases” up the line, in order to determine how the Court would rule in any given situation.
While they, through their actions, failed here, specifically with regards to how they had absolutely “no problem with women obtaining an abortion – who lived in El Paso – over in New Mexico, a state which had absolutely zero regulations being required by Texas from women attempting to obtain a pre-viable abortion, Justice Breyer went out of his way, along with the majority – to unwittingly allow repeat cases (think the Affordable Health Care Act of 2010) to determine post-implementation damages should THOSE post implementations prove to place those falsely accusing the law of being their cause. While I see his argument to be completely sound, I do not know what effect this will have on those who are simply hell-bent on destroying that law!