Supreme Court doesn’t block Texas abortion law, sets hearing

2021-10-22 17:45:19 –

Washington — The Supreme Court has allowed Texas law prohibiting most abortions to remain intact, but agreed to hear the case in early November.

The Justice Department and abortion providers can sue in federal court for a law that Judge Sonia Sotomayor said was “enacted in Texas, openly ignoring the constitutional rights of women seeking treatment for abortion.” Deciding whether, the judge said on Friday.

Answering that question will help you decide if the law should be blocked while the legal objection continues. The court is moving at an unusually fast pace, suggesting plans to make decisions quickly. The discussion is set on November 1st.

For the time being, the court proceedings leave the law saying that the clinic has helped reduce abortion by 80% in the second largest state in the United States.

Judges said in their order that they had postponed action at the request of the Department of Justice to put the law on hold. Sotomayor wrote that she would have now blocked the law.

“But future arbitrage promises provide calm comfort to Texas women seeking abortion treatment who are currently eligible for relief,” Sotomayor wrote.

Sotomayor was the only judge to clarify her view, but apparently did not have five votes in nine courts to immediately block the law on Friday. Only four judges are needed to decide to hear the case.

In response to an urgent submission by the abortion provider, the court first refused to block the law in September. The vote was 5-4, with three former President Donald Trump appointed, with a majority joining the other two conservatives. Chief Justice John Roberts has joined Soto Mayor and two other liberal judges to vote to put the law on hold during a court battle in a lower court.

But now, on rare occasions, the judge has decided to weight the matter before the lower court decides the matter decisively.

Kimberlyn Schwartz, a spokeswoman for Texas Right to Life, said he was pleased that the law remained in force. “This is a great step forward for the pro-life movement, as the law continues to save an estimated 100 babies per day and judges actually discuss whether these proceedings are valid from the beginning,” Schwartz said in a statement. “.

Whole Woman’s Health CEO Amy Hagstrom Miller said Friday’s order continued to refuse treatment at her four clinics in Texas, in addition to the hundreds already denied. Said that it meant that. Providers say the ability of nearly 20 Texas clinics to remain open is threatened by longer legislation, but Hagstrom Miller said he was unaware of the imminent closure. ..

But she said the clinic is trying to “unite and acquire resources” to keep the door open. In 2013, another restrictive abortion law in Texas closed half of the state’s more than 40 clinics. The Supreme Court eventually withdrew the law in 2016, but some clinics were not reopened.

“It’s only a matter of time before the law continues to come into force,” said Hagström Miller. “It will close the clinic and further thin out the care structure needed to care for people throughout the state.”

The law has been in force since September, with the exception of a district court order suspension that lasted only 48 hours, and when heart activity is detected, some women become pregnant, usually for about six weeks. Abortion is prohibited before you know that you are.

It was long before the Supreme Court’s major abortion ruling allowed the state to ban abortion, but the court issued an abortion from Mississippi in the Roe v. Wade case and the planned parent-child relationship vs. Casey case. I agreed to hear an appeal requesting dismissal.

However, Texas law was written to avoid early federal court reviews by putting its enforcement in the hands of civilians rather than state officials.

The focus of the High Court’s debate is not on abortion bans, but on whether the Justice Department and its providers can sue and obtain court orders that effectively impede law enforcement, the Supreme Court said in a brief order.

If the law remains in force, “This court’s decision is not safe. The state does not have to comply with or challenge disagreeing precedents. They simply illegally exercise their disliked rights. It could be, “the Byden administration wrote. A brief description submitted earlier in the day.

For about 24 weeks, before the time when the foetation could survive outside the womb, the ban on abortion enforced by other states was blocked by the court because it contradicted the Supreme Court’s case.

“Texas shouldn’t just combine its unconstitution with an unprecedented enforcement scheme designed to circumvent traditional mechanisms for judicial review and get different results,” the government wrote. rice field.

The day before, the state said the federal government lacked the power to file a proceeding to challenge Texas’ ban and asked the court to leave the law in place.

The Justice Department has filed a proceeding over the law after the Supreme Court refused previous efforts to temporarily suspend the measures taken by the abortion provider.

In early October, Judge Robert Pittman of the US District Court ruled, put the law on hold, and allowed the resumption of abortion.

Two days later, three judges from the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals enforced the law.

The court has already heard discussions on December 1 in a Mississippi case seeking the court to dismiss Roe and Casey’s decision.


Associated Press writer Paul Weber contributed this report from Austin, Texas.

Supreme Court doesn’t block Texas abortion law, sets hearing Source link Supreme Court doesn’t block Texas abortion law, sets hearing

Back to top button