Iowa passes heartbeat law,hoping to get challenge to end Roe Vs Wade at SC

[del]

Hmm yeah, cons are all for state's rights when it suits them (abortioin) but call for jailing state officials when it doesn't suit them (sanctuary status).

All these bogus 'abortion laws' in these states are illegal. Abortion is legal per the SC. Period.

Read the link dingus they passed this to force it to the SC to get it overturned. Personally I am cool with abortion when its nonwhites and liberals aborting!

you can't force scotus to do anything

it'll get tossed long before

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Hmm yeah, cons are all for state's rights when it suits them (abortioin) but call for jailing state officials when it doesn't suit them (sanctuary status).

All these bogus 'abortion laws' in these states are illegal. Abortion is legal per the SC. Period.

Read the link dingus they passed this to force it to the SC to get it overturned. Personally I am cool with abortion when its nonwhites and liberals aborting!

They can't "force" anything to the Supreme Court.

A federal district court will rule on this, and put an injunction in place within minutes. Iowa will appeal in to the 8th Circuit, who will confirm the district court's ruling and injunction. Then Iowa will attempt to appeal it to SCOTUS.

But SCOTUS doesn't have to take the case - and they almost certainly won't take it - which will leave the circuit court ruling in place.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Hmm yeah, cons are all for state's rights when it suits them (abortioin) but call for jailing state officials when it doesn't suit them (sanctuary status).

All these bogus 'abortion laws' in these states are illegal. Abortion is legal per the SC. Period.

Read the link dingus they passed this to force it to the SC to get it overturned. Personally I am cool with abortion when its nonwhites and liberals aborting!

Aww you have yourself a longstanding never ending delusion that you continually feed bugwit. Just one in your list though I'm sure.

 

[del]

The last time the Supreme Court had the chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.

In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.

"In a way, it’s just too easy a case," said Paul Gowder, a law professor at the University of Iowa who teaches constitutional law. "The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law."

Republicans hope a challenge to Iowa's fetal heartbeat bill will overturn Roe v. Wade. How would that work?

waste of taxpayer money

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The last time the Supreme Court had the chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.

In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.

"In a way, it’s just too easy a case," said Paul Gowder, a law professor at the University of Iowa who teaches constitutional law. "The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law."

Republicans hope a challenge to Iowa's fetal heartbeat bill will overturn Roe v. Wade. How would that work?

waste of taxpayer money

Oh, but it gets them the admiration of folks like Nazi-boy.

I'm sure it's worth every penny to them, even though they know it'll never go anywhere.

 

[Preacher]

Then

Hmm yeah, cons are all for state's rights when it suits them (abortioin) but call for jailing state officials when it doesn't suit them (sanctuary status).

All these bogus 'abortion laws' in these states are illegal. Abortion is legal per the SC. Period.

Read the link dingus they passed this to force it to the SC to get it overturned. Personally I am cool with abortion when its nonwhites and liberals aborting!

They can't "force" anything to the Supreme Court.

A federal district court will rule on this, and put an injunction in place within minutes. Iowa will appeal in to the 8th Circuit, who will confirm the district court's ruling and injunction. Then Iowa will attempt to appeal it to SCOTUS.

But SCOTUS doesn't have to take the case - and they almost certainly won't take it - which will leave the circuit court ruling in place.

Then they just pass another law etc until the SC does take it up. Hopefully by then Kennedy and Ginsburg and Breyer will be dead or retired replaced by 3 CONSERVATIVE justices!

 

[Preacher]

The last time the Supreme Court had the chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.

In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.

"In a way, it’s just too easy a case," said Paul Gowder, a law professor at the University of Iowa who teaches constitutional law. "The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law."

Republicans hope a challenge to Iowa's fetal heartbeat bill will overturn Roe v. Wade. How would that work?

waste of taxpayer money

Oh, but it gets them the admiration of folks like Nazi-boy.

I'm sure it's worth every penny to them, even though they know it'll never go anywhere.

Lol's butt hurt still because you can't come to terms with my racial pride....you are one pathetic being. YAWN!

 

[SaxxyBlues]

Iowa passes 'fetal heartbeat' abortion ban, most restrictive in U.S.

Smart move! I love it. Me and my wife knew with ALL of our kids we were pregnant at 6 weeks or sooner! That's no excuse to murder the baby. Don't want one? Wrap it up,get on birth control,get sterilized etc etc.

Abortion is not legally murder: Death of an unborn child who is "quick" (fetus is moving) can be murder, provided there was premeditation, malice and no legal authority. Thus, abortion is not murder under the law.

 

[Preacher]

Iowa passes 'fetal heartbeat' abortion ban, most restrictive in U.S.

Smart move! I love it. Me and my wife knew with ALL of our kids we were pregnant at 6 weeks or sooner! That's no excuse to murder the baby. Don't want one? Wrap it up,get on birth control,get sterilized etc etc.

Abortion is not legally murder: Death of an unborn child who is "quick" (fetus is moving) can be murder, provided there was premeditation, malice and no legal authority. Thus, abortion is not murder under the law.

Twist it however you want. Its murder. Not going to argue nor discuss what is and is not murder with libtards.

 

[SaxxyBlues]

Typical conservative answer.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Then

Hmm yeah, cons are all for state's rights when it suits them (abortioin) but call for jailing state officials when it doesn't suit them (sanctuary status).

All these bogus 'abortion laws' in these states are illegal. Abortion is legal per the SC. Period.

Read the link dingus they passed this to force it to the SC to get it overturned. Personally I am cool with abortion when its nonwhites and liberals aborting!

They can't "force" anything to the Supreme Court.

A federal district court will rule on this, and put an injunction in place within minutes. Iowa will appeal in to the 8th Circuit, who will confirm the district court's ruling and injunction. Then Iowa will attempt to appeal it to SCOTUS.

But SCOTUS doesn't have to take the case - and they almost certainly won't take it - which will leave the circuit court ruling in place.

Then they just pass another law etc until the SC does take it up. Hopefully by then Kennedy and Ginsburg and Breyer will be dead or retired replaced by 3 CONSERVATIVE justices!

They're not going to take it up. Not now, not tomorrow, not the day after that.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The last time the Supreme Court had the chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.

In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.

"In a way, it’s just too easy a case," said Paul Gowder, a law professor at the University of Iowa who teaches constitutional law. "The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law."

Republicans hope a challenge to Iowa's fetal heartbeat bill will overturn Roe v. Wade. How would that work?

waste of taxpayer money

Oh, but it gets them the admiration of folks like Nazi-boy.

I'm sure it's worth every penny to them, even though they know it'll never go anywhere.

Lol's butt hurt still because you can't come to terms with my racial pride....you are one pathetic being. YAWN!

Awww. Nazi-boy is upset that I call him Nazi-boy.

Too bad, so sad.

 

[del]

Lol's butt hurt still because you can't come to terms with my racial pride....you are one pathetic being. YAWN!

i don't know what race you're part of but i'm glad it isn't mine.

 

[Preacher]

The last time the Supreme Court had the chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.

In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.

"In a way, it’s just too easy a case," said Paul Gowder, a law professor at the University of Iowa who teaches constitutional law. "The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law."

Republicans hope a challenge to Iowa's fetal heartbeat bill will overturn Roe v. Wade. How would that work?

waste of taxpayer money

Oh, but it gets them the admiration of folks like Nazi-boy.

I'm sure it's worth every penny to them, even though they know it'll never go anywhere.

Lol's butt hurt still because you can't come to terms with my racial pride....you are one pathetic being. YAWN!

Awww. Nazi-boy is upset that I call him Nazi-boy.

Too bad, so sad.

No clown dick.....I am honored actually. But I am not a National Socialist but hey you wanna keep being wrong by all means stay consistently stupid. I am a Racial Socialist not a National Socialist...but whatever I laugh at your ignorance just like I do with all the other libtarded clowns here.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The last time the Supreme Court had the chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.

In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.

"In a way, it’s just too easy a case," said Paul Gowder, a law professor at the University of Iowa who teaches constitutional law. "The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law."

Republicans hope a challenge to Iowa's fetal heartbeat bill will overturn Roe v. Wade. How would that work?

waste of taxpayer money

Oh, but it gets them the admiration of folks like Nazi-boy.

I'm sure it's worth every penny to them, even though they know it'll never go anywhere.

Lol's butt hurt still because you can't come to terms with my racial pride....you are one pathetic being. YAWN!

Awww. Nazi-boy is upset that I call him Nazi-boy.

Too bad, so sad.

No clown dick.....I am honored actually. But I am not a National Socialist but hey you wanna keep being wrong by all means stay consistently stupid. I am a Racial Socialist not a National Socialist...but whatever I laugh at your ignorance just like I do with all the other libtarded clowns here.

There's no need to cry about it, Nazi-boy. It's ok.

Now, let's get back to the topic of the thread.

The SCOTUS will never hear this, Iowan taxpayers will pay for useless litigation, and the State legislature will be able to go back to their districts to whine about the evil courts overturning the will of the people.

Again, the politicians will win, and the people will lose.

 

[Preacher]

The last time the Supreme Court had the chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.

In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.

"In a way, it’s just too easy a case," said Paul Gowder, a law professor at the University of Iowa who teaches constitutional law. "The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law."

Republicans hope a challenge to Iowa's fetal heartbeat bill will overturn Roe v. Wade. How would that work?

waste of taxpayer money

Oh, but it gets them the admiration of folks like Nazi-boy.

I'm sure it's worth every penny to them, even though they know it'll never go anywhere.

Lol's butt hurt still because you can't come to terms with my racial pride....you are one pathetic being. YAWN!

Awww. Nazi-boy is upset that I call him Nazi-boy.

Too bad, so sad.

No clown dick.....I am honored actually. But I am not a National Socialist but hey you wanna keep being wrong by all means stay consistently stupid. I am a Racial Socialist not a National Socialist...but whatever I laugh at your ignorance just like I do with all the other libtarded clowns here.

There's no need to cry about it, Nazi-boy. It's ok.

Kudos for you being consistently stupid. Lock step left right left with the rest of the stupid little totalitarian leftists. You keep thinking you are insulting me when its a VERY high honor to be a National Socialist.

 

[del]

^
paint chips afficianado

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Oh, but it gets them the admiration of folks like Nazi-boy.

I'm sure it's worth every penny to them, even though they know it'll never go anywhere.

Lol's butt hurt still because you can't come to terms with my racial pride....you are one pathetic being. YAWN!

Awww. Nazi-boy is upset that I call him Nazi-boy.

Too bad, so sad.

No clown dick.....I am honored actually. But I am not a National Socialist but hey you wanna keep being wrong by all means stay consistently stupid. I am a Racial Socialist not a National Socialist...but whatever I laugh at your ignorance just like I do with all the other libtarded clowns here.

There's no need to cry about it, Nazi-boy. It's ok.

Kudos for you being consistently stupid. Lock step left right left with the rest of the stupid little totalitarian leftists. You keep thinking you are insulting me when its a VERY high honor to be a National Socialist.

Honestly, I only do it because I love watching you inevitably melt down about it.

You're really easy to trigger, you know that? And its a lot of fun to watch you squirm.

Now let's get back to the topic at hand.

 

[The Professor]

The proposed law is definitely in violation of the ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in the case of Roe v Wade. If it is signed into law it will be appealed and the courts will rule against it. For those of you who do not know the details of Roe v Wade this is the relevant portion of the decision (all highlights are my own):

With respect to the State's important and legitimate interest in the health of the mother, the "compelling" point, in the light of present medical knowledge, is at approximately the end of the first trimester. This is so because of the now-established medical fact, referred to above at 149, that, until the end of the first trimester mortality in abortion may be less than mortality in normal childbirth. It follows that, from and after this point, a State may regulate the abortion procedure to the extent that the regulation reasonably relates to the preservation and protection of maternal health. Examples of permissible state regulation in this area are requirements as to the qualifications of the person who is to perform the abortion; as to the licensure of that person; as to the facility in which the procedure is to be performed, that is, whether it must be a hospital or may be a clinic or some other place of less-than-hospital status; as to the licensing of the facility; and the like.

This means, on the other hand, that, for the period of pregnancy prior to this "compelling" point, the attending physician, in consultation with his patient, is free to determine, without regulation by the State, that, in his medical judgment, the patient's pregnancy should be terminated. If that decision is reached, the judgment may be effectuated by an abortion free of interference by the State.

With respect to the State's important and legitimate interest in potential life, the "compelling" point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother's womb. State regulation protective of fetal life after viability thus has both logical and biological justifications. If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

CONCLUSION: The proposed Iowa law is a direct violation of the ruling of the SCOTUS. If the bill is signed into law it will certainly be appealed and the Courts will strike it down. If the State of Iowa attempts to enforce this law, anyone injured by its implementation will have recourse against the State.

 

[JoeB131]

So was slavery. It was undone, if you recall.

By Constitutional Amendment passed at the barrel of a gun.

Abortion isn't like slavery... a better comparison would be to prohibition.

Before Roe v. Wade, women had as many abortions as they have now. They went to their doctors, the doctors performed the abortion, and then they wrote something else down on their charts.

The thing is now, there is not a woman of child bearing age who hasn't lived at a time when abortion was legal.