Judge Blocks Texas Abortion Law

Was supposed to go into effect on Tuesday

  • Share
  • Read Later
Tamir Kalifa / AP

Abortion rights supporters rally on the floor of the State Capitol rotunda in Austin, Texas, July 12, 2013.

A federal judge blocked part of Texas’ tough new abortion law as unconstitutional on Monday, just hours before it was set to go into effect.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel made the decision after hearing three days of testimony about the law, among the toughest anti-abortion measures in the country, the Associated Press reports. Among other things, the law would require doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, cut back on where and when women can take pills that induce abortions, and block abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

Yeakel ruled the law would violate the rights of patients to access abortion and of doctors to do what’s best for their patients. The state is likely to file an emergency appeal.

Lawyers for Texas abortion providers, including Planned Parenthood, argued that the new law would shut down a third of abortion clinics in the entire state, and that it did not have women’s best interests in mind. The office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican candidate for governor, said the law would protect both women and unborn fetuses from harm.

The law was fiercely protested by Democrats before its passage in July, and a long filibuster by Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis temporarily blocked passage of the bill and vaulted her to liberal stardom. She is now running for governor against Abbott.

[AP]

28 comments
MrKnowitall433
MrKnowitall433

All women are WHRES except for my mom,and she's a suspect!!!!!!

LoisAnnWomack
LoisAnnWomack

Why is okay to torture and kill babies?  I thought liberals were the ones who were more compassionate than conservatives.  I guess they don't care about babies since they can't vote.

SvcStarCsltg
SvcStarCsltg

Why is it so unrealistic to say that if you havent made up your mind in 20 weeks, its too late to have an abortion? Why is wanting it performed in a place with access to hospital care if something goes wrong violating your rights? Why is it, that we are supposed to bend over backwards to give you the right to have an abortion, but we have to have federally regulated healthcare imposed upon the rest of us?

I am a libertarian for the most part. What you do is your choice as long as it doesnt affect others. This being said, at 20 weeks, it is affecting others, the fetus that can live on its own at that point. I am amazed to read here how untolerant I am because i think giving a woman who is pregnant 20 weeks to get  an abortion or follow thru, but Im not allowed to decide if and what healthcare I want?  I also have to ask this, why is it that the woman has sole decision on whether to keep the kid or have an abortion, but the father who is financially responsible for the same child for 18 years has no say? 18 years of child support should at least give the father some equal say in the conversation. I love how fairness is distributed in todays world.

jattwater311
jattwater311

Hooray! Since when does the government have the right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body, medically speaking. Their not telling all these men creating children and not supporting them to get a vesectomy. We have so many unwanted children, women killing their babies, abandoned children, abused children, why on earth would we want to up the anti? There are many reasons a woman might consider an abortion, rape, incest, poverty, drug addict, and the list goes on and on. It is not the goverments right, nor business who and why one might get one. Why not change the laws on making it easier to adopt vs this? There are so many needy children just waiting for homes. How about we fix this problem before jumping ahead of ourselves. How about we fix the poverty levels before we ask for more children...Seems to me there are many other issues to address before you take on trying to tell woman what the h--- she can or cannot do with her body!

floydhowardjr
floydhowardjr

The lengths to which people will go to kill defenseless babies in the womb are criminal, terroristic and cowardly. Everyone who does so should face an advocate for the baby who will physically fight to stop the crime. 50 million babies killed in their mother’s wombs in America. The slaughter of the innocents. There’s a payday someday!

 

TallusRip
TallusRip

I was so glad to read this article earlier today on the local Austin news website.  I couldn't believe the audacity of the government to even try to hide the disgusting truths behind their draconian laws.


In Texas...where it almost came to pass that a CORPSE had more rights to bodily autonomy than a living woman.

Pro-Lifers can take a hike.  It's been consistently shown that they don't even know what they'd do to women as punishment if abortion ever became outlawed.  They protest food-stamps, comprehensive sex education, access to birth control, general healthcare...all the things that kids NEED in order to thrive after they've left the womb.  Unfortunately, because Pro-Lifers stop their support once the baby leaves the body, they are enormous hypocrites and should be banned from having any say in the matter until they change their stance on all the other issues.  You can't be Pro-Life but then anti-Child/Family in the same sentence.  You have to be Pro-Choice...otherwise you're no better than a rapist.

DavidStrayer
DavidStrayer

It is virtually incomprehensible as to why the self-proclaimed Party of Individual Freedom is so insistent on controllling women's reproductive activities.  

Cuccinelli, the GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia, wants to outlaw all sexual intercourse that isn't in the missionary position. The Republican party across the country wants to prevent women from controlling their bodies, accessing contraception and many other perversions of their so-called dedication to individual freedom.

There are women who vote Republican.  But I have no idea why.

kamanalonokapu
kamanalonokapu

Men commit 97 1/2% of all the crimes in the world yet they object to women having abortions as if the women are criminals.  Men should first focus their attention on the transgressions of men and keep their noses out of womanly matters.

AlisonS49216591
AlisonS49216591

<!--Google is paying 85$ per hour! Just work for few hours & spend more time with friends and family. Yesterday I bought a top of the range Lancia after having made $8755 this month . Its the most-financialy rewarding I've had. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it

Blue48.ℂℴm -->

ThomasHall
ThomasHall

Gee, a Texas and red state court that was not bought and paid for.

formerlyjames
formerlyjames

A perfect example of the value of checks and balances, including judicial review.  If the legislative branch doesn't like interference by what they call "activist" judges, they would do well to tone down their fervor, religious and otherwise, and become more rational and democratic. 

Hollywooddeed
Hollywooddeed

I'll give up my constitutional rights, bodily autonomy and most personal decisions to the government right after you do.

Hollywooddeed
Hollywooddeed

@LoisAnnWomack  Why is it okay for GOTP politicians to stick their pointy noses into my most personal, legal decisions?  I thought they were the party of small government.

DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

@LoisAnnWomack If it was a baby, you'd have a point.  It isn't.  It's a fetus.  Babies are born.  Fetuses are not.   And compassion should be reserved for people who have actually been born - especially when a fetus is endangering their life.

You are entitled to decide what you want to do with your body.  You are not entitled to decide what another person does with theirs.

I will take the "liberal" stance of aborting unwanted fetuses over the conservative stance of the deliberate killing of people who HAVE been born to further the goals of the wealthy.  And perhaps that's why rightists are so against abortion.  They need fodder for their wars and unwanted people to who have to go on welfare, which drives the propaganda machine against liberals.

And here's a question for you about compassion: Who will you turn to when YOU need a helping hand, conservatives or liberals?

And if you're SO concerned about compassion, how many unwanted children did you pay the mothers to carry, deliver and raise just so the mothers didn't get their fetuses aborted?  I think you'd rather sit there and make hysterical false equivalencies, poisoning the well and a faulty analogy in an appeal to emotion in good Goebbels fashion which will do nothing to change anyone's mind on the subject.

So it's not okay to torture and kill babies.  It IS okay to abort fetuses.  If you would kindly learn the difference, and what a logical fallacy is and why they're bad, we could have a rational discussion.

Good luck with that.


DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

@SvcStarCsltg The magic number of 20 is hardly enough time to arrange an abortion if it's desired.  Most women don't know they're pregnant until week 6-8, leaving them 14 weeks (at most) to find a clinic and schedule one.  There is a serious backlog of need, because rightists have done everything they can to shut them down, and only a few operate in many states.  The expense of travel, arranging time off work (and making that explanation shouldn't be necessary, but could result in the person being FIRED because Christians are like that - read about the waiter who wasn't given a tip for excellent services, but was denied one because the Christian couple objected to his "lifestyle".)

That usually means unusually long wait times, not to mention the fact that most of these states mandate "counseling" that only delays things until that magical 20 weeks is past and the woman is stuck with the health issues and potentially a child.

And to hell with "father's rights".  It's NOT HIS BODY.  If the fetus is born and becomes a bouncing baby, then he has some rights.  If he didn't want to be a father in the first place, he should have used contraception.  If he didn't, he needs to man up and take responsibility for his actions.  WOMEN HAVE ALWAYS CONTROLLED CONSENSUAL SEX.  When it's given, when it isn't.  That is an evolutionary fact of life, and our laws reflect this by making rape illegal.  You have no say when it will happen.  You have control over when it won't, if you decide not to have it when it's available.

No one ever said life is fair.  The fact is, men want kids more than women do.  The other fact is, women control when, and if, a kid is conceived.

And ALL OF THIS DEBATE is based ENTIRELY on religious grounds which have absolutely NO direct references in the Bible.  Not one.  In fact, much of the Bible says abortion is allowed.

Assigning a hard number to the length of a pregnancy before which someone can get an abortion and after which they CAN'T, then putting in costly obstacles and reducing the availability of it,  denies women the "right to life" who suffer from complications, access to health care or other complications.  Add to that the cost of early deliveries (both medically at birth and life-time for those born prematurely), and you're looking at a massive public bill that rightists keep trying to cut off - resulting in more death, destruction, crime, welfare and other not so wonderful things that have SUBSTANTIALLY gone down since Roe V Wade.

So, yeah, 20 weeks is ludicrous in today's environment - ESPECIALLY in red states.

LoisAnnWomack
LoisAnnWomack

@jattwater311 Why don't women use birth control?  That would take care of the majority of women having an abortion. 

DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

@floydhowardjrBetter put God at the top of that list of "murderers" because there are an estimated 200 million spontaneous abortions every year WORLD WIDE.

Oh, and according to some sources, there are only about 4.4 million confirmed pregnancies in the U.S. every year.  about 1 in four results in a miscarriage (which is God's way of saying, "Sorry, mistake!").  Another million or so are aborted.  That's somewhat lower than your "50 million each year in America" quote.  I know people with an agenda LOVE hyperbole because ti's intended to persuade others to their cause, but really, inflating the number by a factor of 50?  Was that necessary?  Since Roe V. Wade, it's only been about 50 million abortions, with another 60 million miscarriages.

You certainly seem quite passionate about it, if completely misleading in your numbers and over the top in your arguments. So let's list what's wrong with what you posted, shall we?

"The lengths to which people will go to kill defenseless babies in the womb are criminal, terroristic and cowardly"  

Aside from really bad spelling, there are two rational problems this statement.  First of all, the contradiction of babies in the womb.  By definition, a baby isn't in a womb.  A fetus is.  The "criminal, terroristic (sp) and cowardly" appendages are both inaccurate and ad hominem attacks.  Abortions are legal, therefore not criminal.  Terrorism is perpetuated against people unwilling to experience it.  Those who get abortions seek them out, therefore having an abortion is not "terroristic".  As for cowardly, considering that abortions do pose a small risk to the mother, and there are people like you out there who would want to see them in jail or killed (And with no regard for their "right to life"), it seems that it takes some courage to do it.  That, too, undermines the accuracy of your statement.

"Everyone who does so should face an advocate for the baby who will physically fight to stop the crime."

That's called terrorism, kidnapping, unlawful restraint, assault, murder - all depending on the outcome.  What happens if the "advocate" kills the mother when she fights back?  Yeah, great thinking there.  That fallacy is called "delusional thinking".  It's quite common in countries that sponsor terrorism.

"50 million babies killed in their mother’s wombs in America."

No more like a million, and dropping, every year.  WORLD WIDE, it's between 40 and 50 million a year, but I'm not the one who put the wrong statistic in there - you did.

"The slaughter of the innocents."

That's a logical fallacy called an appeal to emotion.  It's not only inaccurate, but from a religious point of view, false.  All people are sinful and if you consider them "innocents", then they're still sinners.  So they're not innocent.  And the bible also advocated for killing both babies (up to a month old) and pregnant women.

"There’s a payday someday!"

Well, unless you go off and start being a complete hypocrite about the "right to life", that some day is probably never going to come because your belief system is a myth to begin with.  But if you mean that as in an "I'm going to make people who do that pay." sort of way, then that IS terrorism and an appeal to force logical fallacy (Do what I say or else!).

So seriously, the sum total of your argument was zero - or less than zero.  It contained nothing relevant.  it was inaccurate.  It was potentially threatening, which would be of interest to law enforcement.

DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

@leinanikd That's a good question.  Admission privileges are when a physician has been granted liberty to admit their own patients under their care to a particular hospital and to continue their care in the hospital.

While this sounds like a reasonable stipulation, the way the medical system works makes it considerably less than what it seems. If someone is conducting an eye exam (for example) and the patient suffers from a severe allergic reaction, they may be admitted to the hospital under the care of a physician who can deal with that kind of issue.  An eye doctor really can't except for emergency care on site.  Longer term care may require other specialties and expertise.

An abortion doctor may not have the expertise to deal with some complications like that.  They can stabilize the patient, call for an ambulance and try to mitigate any negative occurrences.  But some things require more expertise, more people, more training, better facilities that are NOT normally needed.  And the abortion doctor would not be qualified to "follow" that patient, let alone treat them.  Such would be best left up to the patient's regular physician (if they have admitting privileges) or to the specialists and physicians who treated them in the first place. 

The bottom line is that having admission privileges only helps if the doctor is actually going to attend to the patient in the hospital.  That's not what MOST physicians ever do.  They hand off care to those who better know how to treat those patients.

The other side of that is that a lot of hospitals are run by religions.  They don't ALLOW abortions, though they'll USUALLY (but not always) treat people who have complications secondary to them in an emergency.  They WILL NOT extend admission privileges to a doctor who performs abortions because their specialty doesn't fit with their religious beliefs.  And some hospitals simply have a no abortions policy, which also negates admission privileges for abortion specialists. 

And if they do manage to get admission privileges, the odds are very good it will be at a hospital that is further away than the closest one, thus risking the life of the patient (and increasing medical costs) with a longer ambulance ride.

The idea behind a legal mandate to force abortion specialists to get admission privileges to hospitals is to keep them from being able to legally perform abortions in the first place.  It has nothing to do with good treatment or medical practices.

LoisAnnWomack
LoisAnnWomack

@TallusRip Not that I condone rape, but I think torturing and killing not only short term babies, but babies that are born alive tortured and then murdered  is a lot worse than rape.  If you're so concerned about people needing help, then adopt a family.  See how many of you're liberal friends will do the same.  I'm from a small town in Texas and I know quite a number of conservatives who have done that it's not just money and things but also helping them find jobs and affordable housing and just being there for them as a friend..  Put your money where your mouth is.

SvcStarCsltg
SvcStarCsltg

I have to ask myself if you have the same passion about the right I have to carry a gun? Do you have the same disregard for a criminals life who is endangering my family or myself? I find it funny how you can spew such hatred at people who disagree with your ideas on abortion, but then are the first who wants to take guns when criminals are killed by other people using their rights. Its amazing how democrats have no problem killing unborn babies, but want to do everything possible to keep them alive once they are born while republicans are determined they get borned and then they are on their own. Seems like there is a lot of flaws in both sides and alot of reason in the middle somewhere?

LoisAnnWomack
LoisAnnWomack

@DavidStrayer Women have the right to what they want with their bodies, but what about the rights of the unborn babies that have no say whether to live or not.  If women want freedom to do what they want with their bodies then they need to take responsibility for their bodies and learn there are consequences for everything you do.

somervillechangeling
somervillechangeling

@DavidStrayer  

 It is virtually incomprehensible as to why the party that supports social justice makes abortion on demand a litmus test.Reproductive rights do include birth control, and,  more importantly, the right that has always existed; the right to say "no" and wait till one can be a parent. Abortion is not a reproductive activity. It is the modern equivalent to ancient Romans exposing unwanted children. It is the sanitized equivalent to the dying rooms of Chinese state orphanages. 


We can debate when conception occurs, unlike many other Christians, I do not believe it is at fertilization but at the moment of implantation. Many fertilized eggs do not implant and a woman does not know she is pregnant. When implantation occurs, however, the unborn child will develop barring a natural miscarriage or deliberate abortion.


An unborn child may not have the same degree of rights as a fully born human in Western law but it wasn't until Roe v. Wade's strange decision that abortion involved the right to privacy that we were in this mess. Most people considered an unborn child a blessing and abortion was only supported in the case of rape, incest or when the mother's physical life was in danger. Abortion was never meant as a form of birth control, as a means to eugenically eliminate Down's syndrome individuals or as a means for sex selection; but it has become all of the above.

 I am not a tea party member. I was only a registered Republican in college in the 70's during the Cold War, and that was only because the Democratic party veered left on foreign policy after McGovern's candidacy. When the Berlin wall came down, I looked at the "greed is good" domestic agenda of the Republicans and turned away, but that doesn't mean I support the Democratic party as it is today (both parties have issues).

 The tea party's individual freedom is only the freedom Ayn Rand offered her cult followers, the freedom to agree with her without dissent and to make selfishness a vice and altruism a virtue. The Republicans once supported CHIP in return for tax cuts, but they proceeded to destroy that program at the state level, as they have with Medicaid and with the Affordable Care Act.

 I believe our endless war on terror, NSA spying and Obama's desire to get the Trans Pacific Partnership fast tracked without Congressional input show the Democratic party is not much different. Our society is stumbling towards dystopia with the parties focused on fringe issues as a litmus test.

My radical ideas support a guaranteed annual income without the bureaucracy and means tests that bedevil social security disability and welfare. Give everyone a living income and then tax it as income. That way no one falls behind and no one has to beg or will find out years later they've been overpaid only to be hounded by the government for  repayment. 


My radical ideas support the necessity for a Congressional declaration of war before the President can send troops overseas. I'm opposed to no bid contracts like we had with the Gulf War and no services need to be outsourced, whether security, maintenance or food service. The U.S. military used to do all that on it's own with conscripts. Bring back universal service, with the military as only one option. Don't let the kids of the 1% stay home playing drinking games in college while the kids from trailer parks go to war. 


But protect all human life. That of the born and that of the unborn. No party can take something like abortion and make it a litmus test for the primaries as Democrats have done. No party can take opposition to government and a hatred of taxation that would shock George Washington as a litmus test. That is why we have deadlock.


Why didn't a Democrat filibuster to prevent Rick Perry from cutting CHIP in prior years when at least one child died because his working parents made too much for medicare but could not afford the cancer treatment that was working, so the child was placed on an experimental treatment? Why was the health of all the born children of the working poor not the litmus test for Texas Democrats? 

Wendy Davis had to filibuster on abortion while her supporters chanted "hail Satan" at Christian pro lifers! Why do Christians like Rick Perry hate government involvement in medical care so much that they would harm the children of working parents (not deadbeat multigenerational, semi-mythical welfare queens but working poor parents).?


I've argued with pastors that rather than just be against Planned Parenthood, that Christian activists, doctors and Republican donors could start a nation wide chain of pay what you can women's (and children's) health clinics. I even recommended the name "Luke's Place" but they scoff at the idea or don't respond. A relative who is a doctor goes on short term missions to Africa but resists volunteering in her own community. 

Something is wrong with Americans today. We can do better.

reallife
reallife

Do you realize how dumb that post makes you look?

Poneros
Poneros

@DavidStrayer They do have binders full of women though.. a great place to store them till you need one.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,105 other followers