What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Justice Department sues Texas over restrictive abortion law

NewsVine_Mariyam

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
6,384
Reaction score
3,388
Points
1,030
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
On a different thread I indicated that I had always been taught that in order to sue someone in civil court you have to show how you were harmed as well as show that the defendant was the proximate cause of said harm and then ask for money damages to make one whole again.

i then asked unless you're not the father of the child how have one, as a plaintiff been harmed?

The only reply I got back was that if the law provides for statutory damages then you can sue, apparently without having to show how you've been harmed (because you haven't been according to standard case law). My next thought was that the law is clearly unconstitutional however until something is done to rescind it, a lot of harm to women in Texas and elsewhere can occur as it is the law for the present.

Attorney General Merrick Garland said Thursday that the Justice Department filed the suit against Texas over its law, which he called “clearly unconstitutional under longstanding Supreme Court precedent.”​
"The United States has the authority and the responsibility to ensure that no state can deprive individuals of their constitutional rights to a legislative scheme specifically designed to prevent the vindication of those rights," Garland said at a news conference.​
The lawsuit, filed Thursday in federal court in Texas, argues the law is unconstitutional and was enacted in open defiance of the Constitution.
Justice Department sues Texas over restrictive abortion law
 

skews13

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
5,554
Reaction score
4,504
Points
2,065
On a different thread I indicated that I had always been taught that in order to sue someone in civil court you have to show how you were harmed as well as show that the defendant was the proximate cause of said harm and then ask for money damages to make one whole again.

i then asked unless you're not the father of the child how have one, as a plaintiff been harmed?

The only reply I got back was that if the law provides for statutory damages then you can sue, apparently without having to show how you've been harmed (because you haven't been according to standard case law). My next thought was that the law is clearly unconstitutional however until something is done to rescind it, a lot of harm to women in Texas and elsewhere can occur as it is the law for the present.

If that logic stands. Every victim of gun violence has standing against gun manufacturers. All blue state governors should pass equal laws in those states.
 

Lysistrata

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
17,478
Reaction score
6,488
Points
360
This Texas law is aimed at removing the First Amendment from the Constitution. No government at any level may remove an individual's right not only to exercise a constitutional right, but also to freely discuss a topic, associate freely with others, exercise religious liberty. The legal doctrine of standing is a backbone of our legal system. According to abbott and the Texas legislature, I can sit back and sue any damned Texan I want to while sitting back next to the Potomac. The legal doctrine of standing apparently does not exist anymore.
 

beagle9

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
29,639
Reaction score
7,518
Points
280
On a different thread I indicated that I had always been taught that in order to sue someone in civil court you have to show how you were harmed as well as show that the defendant was the proximate cause of said harm and then ask for money damages to make one whole again.

i then asked unless you're not the father of the child how have one, as a plaintiff been harmed?

The only reply I got back was that if the law provides for statutory damages then you can sue, apparently without having to show how you've been harmed (because you haven't been according to standard case law). My next thought was that the law is clearly unconstitutional however until something is done to rescind it, a lot of harm to women in Texas and elsewhere can occur as it is the law for the present.
Alot of harm to women can occur eh ??? Are you serious ??? So to hell with the poor baby that is alive with a beating heartbeat eh ? You are one sick human being just saying.

Infact it appears more and more that most leftist are misguided human beings that will face the consequences for their unholy reckless stance's in which they've taken up in this world.
 

beagle9

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
29,639
Reaction score
7,518
Points
280
Biden breaks another campaign promise, in 2020 the senile dumb fck said he wouldn't instruct the DoJ, who to prosecute, what to prosecute or how to prosecute
The man is an opportunistic extreme liar.

Most see it now, but they ignore it because of party. When you have a party that is filled with mental instability, then the only thing they can do is circle the wagons in hopes to remain legit somehow. That's what the nation is dealing with now.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
63,823
Reaction score
21,655
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
"The United States has the authority and the responsibility to ensure that no state can deprive individuals of their constitutional rights to a legislative scheme specifically designed to prevent the vindication of those rights," Garland said at a news conference.
Exactly.

See: Aaron v Cooper (1958).
 

DGS49

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
11,321
Reaction score
6,322
Points
1,065
Location
Pittsburgh
There is no "Constitutional right" to kill your baby, whether born or not. The existence of this right is a fiction peddled for so long that most accept its existence in spite of no support for this "right" in the Constitution.

Where in the Constitution may I confirm the existence of this right? (I won't hold my breath).

Messrs. Biden and Garland wouldn't know a legitimate Constitutional issue if it bit them on the balls.
 

Stann

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2021
Messages
2,291
Reaction score
1,183
Points
893
On a different thread I indicated that I had always been taught that in order to sue someone in civil court you have to show how you were harmed as well as show that the defendant was the proximate cause of said harm and then ask for money damages to make one whole again.

i then asked unless you're not the father of the child how have one, as a plaintiff been harmed?

The only reply I got back was that if the law provides for statutory damages then you can sue, apparently without having to show how you've been harmed (because you haven't been according to standard case law). My next thought was that the law is clearly unconstitutional however until something is done to rescind it, a lot of harm to women in Texas and elsewhere can occur as it is the law for the present.
Thank God somebody has come to their senses. This type of insane legislation needs to be stopped right now. Our laws cannot be based on emotions. the pro-life case is nothing but an emotional issue, abortion should have never been a political issue. It's a medical procedure. A difficult choice at best for those who are faced with it, and should be addressed by the woman, husband, if there is one, and her doctor. No one else should be involved, especially not government.
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
9,411
Reaction score
2,882
Points
210
Location
alaska, usa
If that logic stands. Every victim of gun violence has standing against gun manufacturers. All blue state governors should pass equal laws in those states.
Someone makes consecutive decisions to load the gun with ammunition, take the safety off, aim, and pull the trigger. The gun manufacturer is not responsible for these decisions. The shooter is.

The governors need to get out of our gun cabinets.
 

Stann

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2021
Messages
2,291
Reaction score
1,183
Points
893
Someone makes consecutive decisions to load the gun with ammunition, take the safety off, aim, and pull the trigger. The gun manufacturer is not responsible for these decisions. The shooter is.

The governors need to get out of our gun cabinets.
More importantly, the governors need to get out of women's vaginas.
 

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,647
Reaction score
2,889
Points
918
Alot of harm to women can occur eh ??? Are you serious ??? So to hell with the poor baby that is alive with a beating heartbeat eh ? You are one sick human being just saying.

Infact it appears more and more that most leftist are misguided human beings that will face the consequences for their unholy reckless stance's in which they've taken up in this world.

they're not 'misguided', they're sick little mentally defective gimps, almost always sexual deviants of some disgusting flavor or others, who glory in anti-social psychotic behavior, incapable of human empathy , so they band together with the other freaks and outliers nobody else likes, even their own families don't like most of them, and they run supporting any ridiculous sick thing they know the sane people find repulsive, including homicidal mass murders of babies, as revenge for not being 'accepted' except in prisons and street gangs and other bands of filthy feral animals.
 
Last edited:

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,647
Reaction score
2,889
Points
918
More importantly, the governors need to get out of women's vaginas.

Women need to keep men out of their vaginas if they don't like getting pregnant. The stupid claim making abortions illegal volates their 'freedom of choice' is silly and ridiculous, and patently false. The way to avoid 'unwanted pregnancies' is well known and 100% effective, and entirely a personal decision. If its a case of rape or a medical issue for the mother, then yes, she gets another choice. Otherwise, the baby has rights to life.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$85.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top