NFBW: Big āright to privacyā state Supreme Court decision in the South. and part of the Bible Belt. Justice Kaye Hearn, who was involved in the decision said:
āMost women who are pregnant at six weeks do not want anyone to know, she said, and many women do not want anyone to know if they have had an abortion. ā¢ā¢ā¢ā¢ āI know youāre not a woman,ā she told a lawyer for the state government. āBut what could be more personal than that decision?ā
Cplus6221103-
#13 CarsomyrPlusSix āBecause Congress has no authority in setting the criminal code of the 50 states and abortion is not (and could not be) a āConstitutional right.āā
^
^
Pellinore221105-
#15 Pellinore That is incorrect. The Supremacy Clause in the Constitution establishes that all federal laws (starting with the Constitution and heading down) apply to the States. A State trying to pass a law that says a federal law does not apply to them is called nullification, and that was resolved in the 1830s. ā¢ā¢ā¢ā¢ The federal government is not only allowed but expected to pass federal laws defending Constitutional rights against anyone, including State legislatures, trying to abridge them. Congress has been doing this since day one, even protecting unenumerated rights (under the 9th Am.) such as the rights to vote or to privacy. There is no legal reason why they couldn't do the same for bodily autonomy, for example, and prohibit State laws from nullifying it.
NFBW: The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled today 01/05/23 that the āsix weeks heartbeat abortion restrictionsā violate the state constitutionās right to privacy.
COLUMBIA, S.C. ā The South Carolina Supreme Court on Thursday struck down the stateās six-week abortion ban, ruling it violated the stateās constitutional right to privacy. In a 3-2 vote, the stateās high court wrote, in part, āWe hold that our state constitutional right to privacy extends to a...
www.rawstory.com
Justice Kaye Hearn, who wrote the opinion issued Thursday, is the only woman, and the second woman to serve on the court.
The decision overturns the stateās six-week ban on abortion, a major victory for abortion rights in the South, where the procedure is strictly limited.
www.nytimes.com
Chief Justice Donald Beatty, the second Black justice elected since Reconstruction, joined her in the opinion along with Justice John C. Few. ā¢ā¢ā¢ā¢ Justice Hearn seemed to indicate some sympathy toward the abortion providers during oral arguments. She noted that the plaintiffās side of the courtroom was all female and the stateās side was all male. Most women who are pregnant at six weeks do not want anyone to know, she said, and many women do not want anyone to know if they have had an abortion. ā¢ā¢ā¢ā¢ āI know youāre not a woman,ā she told a lawyer for the state government. āBut what could be more personal than that decision?ā
NFBW: Why can one state give a woman reproductive freedom based on a right to privacy and another state can restrict
reproductive freedom therefore allow the state to invade a pregnant womanās privacy
When a woman lives in a state like South Carolina where reproductive freedom exists but has a job opportunity in a white Christian dominated state that bans abortion; why isnāt her freedom of movement and freedom of conscience interfered with if she does not want to live in a state where mostly white and mostly Christian men in state legislatures want pregnant women to submit to their religious beliefs that life and full blown human rights and personhood begins at conception?
END2301052237