Montana Supreme Court Nixes Extremist Anti Abortion laws, Citing onstitutional Privacy Rights

skews13

Diamond Member
Mar 18, 2017
9,433
11,856
2,265
Montana’s Republican-controlled legislature abrogated privacy rights guaranteed by the state constitution, the court ruled:

nder Montana’s Constitution, the right of individual privacy—that is, the right of personal autonomy or the right to be let alone—is fundamental.

“It is, perhaps, one of the most important rights guaranteed to the citizens of this State, and its separate textual protection in our Constitution reflects Montanans’ historical abhorrence and distrust of excessive governmental interference in their personal lives.”

The high court sided with an advanced practice nurse practitioner and a clinician who challenged a 2005 law, styled “Control of Practice of Abortion,” that limited who could provide health services.

The health professionals also are called advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), family nurse practitioners (FNPs), certified nurse-midwifes (CNMs), and physician assistants (PAs).

The district court ruled that the legislature violated a woman’s “fundamental right of privacy to seek abortion care from a qualified health care provider of her choosing” when enacting the 2005 law.


Hang on America. We will get rid of these anti American extremist assholes, state by state. Election by election.

It's coming, and may take longer in certain areas of the country where the most extreme anti American fringe lunatics are. But it's coming.
 
Montana’s Republican-controlled legislature abrogated privacy rights guaranteed by the state constitution, the court ruled:

nder Montana’s Constitution, the right of individual privacy—that is, the right of personal autonomy or the right to be let alone—is fundamental.

“It is, perhaps, one of the most important rights guaranteed to the citizens of this State, and its separate textual protection in our Constitution reflects Montanans’ historical abhorrence and distrust of excessive governmental interference in their personal lives.”

The high court sided with an advanced practice nurse practitioner and a clinician who challenged a 2005 law, styled “Control of Practice of Abortion,” that limited who could provide health services.

The health professionals also are called advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), family nurse practitioners (FNPs), certified nurse-midwifes (CNMs), and physician assistants (PAs).

The district court ruled that the legislature violated a woman’s “fundamental right of privacy to seek abortion care from a qualified health care provider of her choosing” when enacting the 2005 law.


Hang on America. We will get rid of these anti American extremist assholes, state by state. Election by election.

It's coming, and may take longer in certain areas of the country where the most extreme anti American fringe lunatics are. But it's coming.
Murdering babies isn't "health services." It's first degree murder. It's planned and a hitman or woman is hired to carry out the crime. Who's going to concern themselves with the baby's rights? If not the GOP, then who?
 
Murdering babies isn't "health services." It's first degree murder. It's planned and a hitman or woman is hired to carry out the crime. Who's going to concern themselves with the baby's rights? If not the GOP, then who?
It's not murder if it's legal.
 
Just because a bunch of soulless empty suits says something is "legal" doesn't make it lawful. It was "legal" to throw babies into the fire of Moloch back in the day. Did that legality make it right?
Actually, if the empty suits are state Lakers, them that is exactly what it means.

Murder is a legal term and defines the "unlawful" taking of a life. This, by definition, abortion isn't murder I'm states that legalize abortions.
 
Montana’s Republican-controlled legislature abrogated privacy rights guaranteed by the state constitution, the court ruled:

nder Montana’s Constitution, the right of individual privacy—that is, the right of personal autonomy or the right to be let alone—is fundamental.

“It is, perhaps, one of the most important rights guaranteed to the citizens of this State, and its separate textual protection in our Constitution reflects Montanans’ historical abhorrence and distrust of excessive governmental interference in their personal lives.”

The high court sided with an advanced practice nurse practitioner and a clinician who challenged a 2005 law, styled “Control of Practice of Abortion,” that limited who could provide health services.

The health professionals also are called advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), family nurse practitioners (FNPs), certified nurse-midwifes (CNMs), and physician assistants (PAs).

The district court ruled that the legislature violated a woman’s “fundamental right of privacy to seek abortion care from a qualified health care provider of her choosing” when enacting the 2005 law.


Hang on America. We will get rid of these anti American extremist assholes, state by state. Election by election.

It's coming, and may take longer in certain areas of the country where the most extreme anti American fringe lunatics are. But it's coming.

Great fucking news. Make no mistake about this, abortion will be on the ballot next year. A clear majority of Americans support a Woman's Right To Choose. By passing these kinds of laws in other states, the ReNaziKlans are setting themselves up as losers.
 
" Self Interest Limits "

* No Longer Your Private Property *

A woman killing a man’s baby without informing him is not extremist. Right.
Let us know when the private property semen was not transferred willingly .

The zygote , embryo and fetus are without constitutional protections and are private property of the mother .
 
" Empty Suits Promoted The Dumbfounded dobbs Decision Of Sedition Against Us 14th 9th 1st Amendments "

* Legal Positivism And More Valid Perspectives
*
Just because a bunch of soulless empty suits says something is "legal" doesn't make it lawful. It was "legal" to throw babies into the fire of Moloch back in the day. Did that legality make it right?
Did that legally make it correct ?

Did that legally make it valid ?

Did that legally make it ethical ?

Did that legally make it right is an intellectually defiicient assertion - Applying THe Term Rights As A Descriptor For Articles Of Constitution Is Slang And A Profound Error In Diction .

Abortion can be ethical and valid , while a rite to child ( literally born ) sacrifice , is not ethically valid and not legally valid according to us constitution .
 
" Empty Suits Promoted The Dumbfounded dobbs Decision Of Sedition Against Us 14th 9th 1st Amendments "

* Legal Positivism And More Valid Perspectives
*

Did that legally make it correct ?

Did that legally make it valid ?

Did that legally make it ethical ?

Did that legally make it right is an intellectually defiicient assertion - Applying THe Term Rights As A Descriptor For Articles Of Constitution Is Slang And A Profound Error In Diction .

Abortion can be ethical and valid , while a rite to child ( literally born ) sacrifice , is not ethically valid and not legally valid according to us constitution .
Unfortunately, your cult has made it "legal" to "abort" a baby seconds before birth or even after birth. That will NEVER be ethical or valid.
 

Forum List

Back
Top