Texas cannot block Planner Parenthood for health car system

[JimH52]

U.S. News - Judge: Texas can't ban Planned Parenthood from health program

 

[Greenbeard]

Texas Governor Rick Perry and some Republican lawmakers have said they would rather eliminate the women's healthcare program entirely than direct money to Planned Parenthood clinics.

Delightful.

 

[Ariux]

If poor men can survive without Planned Parenthood, why can't poor women?

 

[Two Thumbs]

U.S. News - Judge: Texas can't ban Planned Parenthood from health program

Texas cannot block Planner Parenthood for health car system

Are you related to TM?


Normally Idc about typos, but damn, copy and paste is your friend.

 

[Two Thumbs]

In a win for Planned Parenthood, U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel ruled Monday there was sufficient evidence the state rule barring Planned Parenthood is unconstitutional. He imposed a temporary injunction against enforcing it until he can hear full arguments.

In other words, he's full of shit and wants to make some headlines.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The state rule, Yeakel determined, violated Planned Parenthood’s rights of free speech and association.
“By requiring plaintiffs to certify that they do not ‘promote’ elective abortions and that they do not ‘affiliate’ with entities that perform or promote elective abortions … Texas is reaching beyond the scope of the government program and penalizing plaintiffs for their protected conduct,” Yeakel wrote in his order.

Austin news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com

Yet more evidence that state governments pose the greater threat to civil liberties.

And Texas State officials are clearly not ignorant of the law, this policy was enacted with utter contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law, and motivated by some perceived partisan gain.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The state rule, Yeakel determined, violated Planned Parenthood’s rights of free speech and association.
“By requiring plaintiffs to certify that they do not ‘promote’ elective abortions and that they do not ‘affiliate’ with entities that perform or promote elective abortions … Texas is reaching beyond the scope of the government program and penalizing plaintiffs for their protected conduct,” Yeakel wrote in his order.

Austin news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com

Yet more evidence that state governments pose the greater threat to civil liberties.

And Texas State officials are clearly not ignorant of the law, this policy was enacted with utter contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law, and motivated by some perceived partisan gain.

And yet state laws restricting access to arm, free speech, privacy all get a pass from the liberals that support them.

oh the hypocritical irony

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The state rule, Yeakel determined, violated Planned Parenthood’s rights of free speech and association.
“By requiring plaintiffs to certify that they do not ‘promote’ elective abortions and that they do not ‘affiliate’ with entities that perform or promote elective abortions … Texas is reaching beyond the scope of the government program and penalizing plaintiffs for their protected conduct,” Yeakel wrote in his order.

Austin news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com

Yet more evidence that state governments pose the greater threat to civil liberties.

And Texas State officials are clearly not ignorant of the law, this policy was enacted with utter contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law, and motivated by some perceived partisan gain.

Why is it that liberal states think they can dictate to other states by using the federal government to impose that's states values on another state?

 

[Two Thumbs]

The state rule, Yeakel determined, violated Planned Parenthood’s rights of free speech and association.
“By requiring plaintiffs to certify that they do not ‘promote’ elective abortions and that they do not ‘affiliate’ with entities that perform or promote elective abortions … Texas is reaching beyond the scope of the government program and penalizing plaintiffs for their protected conduct,” Yeakel wrote in his order.

Austin news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com

Yet more evidence that state governments pose the greater threat to civil liberties.

And Texas State officials are clearly not ignorant of the law, this policy was enacted with utter contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law, and motivated by some perceived partisan gain.

Why is it that liberal states think they can dictate to other states by using the federal government to impose that's states values on another state?

Oh The Irony!!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yet more evidence that state governments pose the greater threat to civil liberties.

And Texas State officials are clearly not ignorant of the law, this policy was enacted with utter contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law, and motivated by some perceived partisan gain.

Why is it that liberal states think they can dictate to other states by using the federal government to impose that's states values on another state?

Oh The Irony!!

Just some of those unanswered questions that will never get answered.

 

[Sallow]

The state rule, Yeakel determined, violated Planned Parenthood’s rights of free speech and association.
“By requiring plaintiffs to certify that they do not ‘promote’ elective abortions and that they do not ‘affiliate’ with entities that perform or promote elective abortions … Texas is reaching beyond the scope of the government program and penalizing plaintiffs for their protected conduct,” Yeakel wrote in his order.

Austin news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com

Yet more evidence that state governments pose the greater threat to civil liberties.

And Texas State officials are clearly not ignorant of the law, this policy was enacted with utter contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law, and motivated by some perceived partisan gain.

And yet state laws restricting access to arm, free speech, privacy all get a pass from the liberals that support them.

oh the hypocritical irony

Case law holds that some "rights" are not unlimited. And for the most part each are pretty complex. Like "arms"...some hold the view that it's a collective right to form a citizen military..not a personal right. Same with privacy..some hold that privacy does not exist in the constitution..while others think it's implicit.