House Democrats Vote To Undermine USSC, Violate Separation of Powers

[easyt65]

Whatever it takes...

BREAKING: House Passes Bills to Enshrine Abortion in Federal Law

House Democrats have passed two measures that would codify abortion into federal law to counter the

pjmedia.com

 

[excalibur]

And has nothing to do with 'Roe' as it permits abortion to the moment of birth.

Every one of the sickos who voted in favor of that voted for infanticide. Evil ghouls that they are.

 

[pknopp]

Nowhere did the Supreme Court say that elected politicians could not pass a law at the federal level.

 

[easyt65]

And has nothing to do with 'Roe' as it permits abortion to the moment of birth.

Every one of the sickos who voted in favor of that voted for infanticide. Evil ghouls that they are.

1. Disagree

2. Agree

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

States can still write their own laws

 

[theHawk]

Nowhere did the Supreme Court say that elected politicians could not pass a law at the federal level.

Good luck amending the constitution.

 

[pknopp]

Good luck amending the constitution.

They never said anything about that. Quote it. There are many things that are not Constitutional rights that there are laws over.

 

[1srelluc]

Nowhere did the Supreme Court say that elected politicians could not pass a law at the federal level.

Truth.....In fact SCOTUS put the ball in their court where it should be.

Now if the gop was not so pants-on-head retarded over the whole thing at the behest of the bible-thumpers they would go with the 15 guardrail (MS Compromise) and be done with the whole thing by November.

And there the dems would be, standing there with their teeth in their mouth.

That said I bet the dems would kill it themselves rather than to give-up a lame campaign issue.....The gop should damn sure put them to the test.

 

[easyt65]

They never said anything about that. Quote it. There are many things that are not Constitutional rights that there are laws over.

...and none of them apply to Democrats...according to Democrats.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Whatever it takes...

BREAKING: House Passes Bills to Enshrine Abortion in Federal Law

House Democrats have passed two measures that would codify abortion into federal law to counter the

pjmedia.com

they tried the same thing with slavery

 

[Esdraelon]

And has nothing to do with 'Roe' as it permits abortion to the moment of birth.

Every one of the sickos who voted in favor of that voted for infanticide. Evil ghouls that they are.

This and their plans for "election reform" both rely on removing the filibuster. America so far has dodged a bullet. Had these people not been thwarted by a couple of their own members, we would be facing real choices of whether to secede or fight.
As soon as they ever get back into power and have that ability, they will go for broke and damn the consequences. They are hateful fools and they will choke on their own hate when they try this coup. IT WILL NOT STAND.

 

[task0778]

Congress has every right to pass whatever legislation they want to, and it isn't undermining he SCOTUS or violating the separation of powers. The Court never said abortion was illegal, they just said the right to an abortion is not a constitutional right. Which means the states and/or the Congress can write civil laws instead and such laws would preempt state laws. BUT - that law doesn't have a chance in hell of passing the Senate, so no worries. Depending on the political blowback in November, a bipartisan abortion bill might happen next year, but there are quite a few extremists on both ends of the political spectrum that wouldn't vote for it.

 

[1srelluc]

Congress has every right to pass whatever legislation they want to, and it isn't undermining he SCOTUS or violating the separation of powers. The Court never said abortion was illegal, they just said the right to an abortion is not a constitutional right. Which means the states and/or the Congress can write civil laws instead and such laws would preempt state laws. BUT - that law doesn't have a chance in hell of passing the Senate, so no worries. Depending on the political blowback in November, a bipartisan abortion bill might happen next year, but there are quite a few extremists on both ends of the political spectrum that wouldn't vote for it.

Who knows, the turtle might put the dems to the test.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Whatever it takes...

BREAKING: House Passes Bills to Enshrine Abortion in Federal Law

House Democrats have passed two measures that would codify abortion into federal law to counter the

pjmedia.com

Actually, the legislature has that power.

IF they can get it past the Senate.

 

[OKTexas]

Nowhere did the Supreme Court say that elected politicians could not pass a law at the federal level.

Sorry bubba, but you're wrong. SCOTUS said abortion is not a Constitutional right, is congress and the president not bound by the exact same Constitution as the courts? The fact is, congress has no more Constitutional authority to impose abortion on the nation than the court did. Well unless they can get an amendment through the States via Article 5. Good luck with that since they don't have a 2/3rds majority in either house.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Truth.....In fact SCOTUS put the ball in their court where it should be.

Now if the gop was not so pants-on-head retarded over the whole thing at the behest of the bible-thumpers they would go with the 15 guardrail (MS Compromise) and be done with the whole thing by November.

And there the dems would be, standing there with their teeth in their mouth.

That said I bet the dems would kill it themselves rather than to give-up a lame campaign issue.....The gop should damn sure put them to the test.

The commies won't buy that. The want unrestricted killing of the unborn or the partially born.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Congress has every right to pass whatever legislation they want to, and it isn't undermining he SCOTUS or violating the separation of powers. The Court never said abortion was illegal, they just said the right to an abortion is not a constitutional right. Which means the states and/or the Congress can write civil laws instead and such laws would preempt state laws. BUT - that law doesn't have a chance in hell of passing the Senate, so no worries. Depending on the political blowback in November, a bipartisan abortion bill might happen next year, but there are quite a few extremists on both ends of the political spectrum that wouldn't vote for it.

It wouldn't have a chance in hell of withstanding a constitutional challenge either. See post 15.

.

 

[pknopp]

Sorry bubba, but you're wrong. SCOTUS said abortion is not a Constitutional right, is congress and the president not bound by the exact same Constitution as the courts?

I never said they did.

The fact is, congress has no more Constitutional authority to impose abortion on the nation than the court did. Well unless they can get an amendment through the States via Article 5. Good luck with that since they don't have a 2/3rds majority in either house.

.

Your opinion is noted.

 

[OKTexas]

I never said they did.



Your opinion is noted.

So what does the Constitution say about situations where the feds are not granted powers. OH RIGHT, SEE THE 10th AMENDMENT!!!!!!!!!

Your opinion is noted and summarily dismissed. The Constitution backs me up.

.

 

[pknopp]

So what does the Constitution say about situations where the feds are not granted powers. OH RIGHT, SEE THE 10th AMENDMENT!!!!!!!!!

Your opinion is noted and summarily dismissed. The Constitution backs me up.

.

The counter-argument would be that a federal law banning abortion violates the Commerce Clause by getting the federal government too involved in state actions. Is that accurate?

Yes. That’s an argument under the Commerce Clause, but the Court’s cases right now allow Congress to regulate more traditional areas of state concern if they include what’s called a jurisdictional hook. That is, limit the statute to regulating procedures that involve some element of interstate commerce.

How the Supreme Court Could Approach Federal Laws Upholding—or Banning—Abortion

My only point is it is hardly as clear cut as you make it out to be as there are many ways to address this.