A Judge Rules Texas' Abortion Ban Is To Restrictive For Women With Pregnancy Problems.

[0311]

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A Texas judge ruled Friday the state’s abortion ban has proven too restrictive for women with serious pregnancy complications and must allow exceptions without doctors fearing the threat of criminal charges.

A judge has ruled Texas' abortion ban is too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications

A Texas judge says the state’s abortion ban has proven too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications and must allow exceptions without the risk of doctors facing criminal charges.

apnews.com

The ruling was the first to undercut Texas’ law since it took effect in 2022 and delivers a major victory to abortion rights supporters, who see the case as a potential blueprint to weaken restrictions elsewhere that Republican-led states have rushed to implement.

However, the injunction was immediately blocked by an appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, the state attorney general’s office said.

”The trial court’s injunction is ineffective, and the status quo remains in effect,” spokesperson Paige Willey said in an email.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Ahh nothing like the judicial branch trying to play the legislative branch.

It's not up to a federal judge to write laws the way he likes. He wasn't elected, lawmakers were.

 

[1srelluc]

Good.....Till TX and the other states that have banned the practice put it to a vote by their citizens states like TX can FOAD.....Free state my ass.

 

[Augustine_]

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A Texas judge ruled Friday the state’s abortion ban has proven too restrictive for women with serious pregnancy complications and must allow exceptions without doctors fearing the threat of criminal charges.

A judge has ruled Texas' abortion ban is too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications

A Texas judge says the state’s abortion ban has proven too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications and must allow exceptions without the risk of doctors facing criminal charges.

apnews.com

The ruling was the first to undercut Texas’ law since it took effect in 2022 and delivers a major victory to abortion rights supporters, who see the case as a potential blueprint to weaken restrictions elsewhere that Republican-led states have rushed to implement.

However, the injunction was immediately blocked by an appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, the state attorney general’s office said.

”The trial court’s injunction is ineffective, and the status quo remains in effect,” spokesperson Paige Willey said in an email.

Good for the judge but sounds unconstitutional to me. The people of Texas went through the proper legislative process in an attempt to increase the female mortality rate, and this Judge seems to be trying to alter the law instead of interpreting it. Keep in mind that the Supreme Court did something similar by creating a law that religious discrimination is okay in the fake lawsuit brought by that wedding website designer. So because the judicial branch no longer serves its purpose, the ruling might stand.

 

[skews13]

Ahh nothing like the judicial branch trying to play the legislative branch.

It's not up to a federal judge to write laws the way he likes. He wasn't elected, lawmakers were.

You mean like the Supreme Court has been doing for the last 30 years?

I sure will be glad when Congress actually starts using its regulatory power over the court.

Regulation. The Constitution actually has the word, and gives Congress authority to impose it.

Article 3 Section 2

In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

It’s just a matter of time before we get the Senate votes needed.

 

[airplanemechanic]

You mean like the Supreme Court has been doing for the last 30 years?

I sure will be glad when Congress actually starts using its regulatory power over the court.

Regulation. The Constitution actually has the word, and gives Congress authority to impose it.

Article 3 Section 2

In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

It’s just a matter of time before we get the Senate votes needed.

Yep. I never said its a new concept.

 

[d0gbreath]

Being forced to give birth to a newborn, simply to watch it die in the next few hours, seems like the wrong way to go about things.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You mean like the Supreme Court has been doing for the last 30 years?

The last 30?

Try the last 100, hack.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Ahh nothing like the judicial branch trying to play the legislative branch.

It's not up to a federal judge to write laws the way he likes. He wasn't elected, lawmakers were.

A judge is make sure the laws are legal and constitutional, and that is what this judge did.