Home | About | Donate

Supreme Court to Hear 'Most Important Abortion Rights Case in 25 Years'


Supreme Court to Hear 'Most Important Abortion Rights Case in 25 Years'

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

Setting the stage for what a leading women's health advocate said will be "the most important abortion rights case in almost 25 years," the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed (pdf) to review a "draconian" Texas law designed to shut down clinics that provide safe, legal abortion services.


Seems like this is a clearcut case of Texas legislators engaging in a conspiracy to deny women their legal and civil rights (not to mention their medical rights). Isn't that some kind of crime?
Of course, if it involves keeping women barefoot and pregnant, it can't possibly be any kind of crime...


No, I think the framing here is all wrong. This is not about men oppressing women. It's about Christianity vs. secularism along with a demagoguery generated for use during election cycles. An improper analysis no only doesn't help us, but divides us. That's the last thing we need more of.


While I have no confidence in the Catholic dominated SCOTUS, even those meatheads won't uphold this insane back door attempt to outlaw abortion. The ramifications for many other medical providers would be an expensive and unenforceable burden. Could you imagine all dentists, podiatrists, chiropractors and the like having to maintain hospital privileges? It would bankrupt most, and chase a good many more off to other professions.
But then again, never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.


There is no right to an abortion. Roe v. Wade held that there is a right to privacy. Any laws banning abortion violate this right to privacy and are therefore unconstitutional.

The notion of a right to an abortion is a negative right like the right to freedom of speech. You don't have right to falsely shout fire in a crowded theater, but Congress may not pass laws infringing your freedom of speech.


Your wrong, Griswold vs. the State of Conn. gave us the right to privacy.


I didn't say there was a right to an abortion. I said "legal and civil rights (not to mention medical rights)."

Women have a right to medical care. When denial of a medical procedure--any kind of medical procedure--causes irreparable harm or death, it seems like there is some culpability on the part of whoever is doing the denying. I'm talking about someone dying on the hospital steps because they are refused admission due to race. I'm talking about people not getting health care because they are native American uranium miners. And I'm talking about women having back-alley abortions.


As long as the man who sexually harassed Anita Hill is on that court, I wouldn't underestimate the power of stupid people at all.


Excellent point. That particular right wing of this court is not reliable for anything other than complete idiocy, in my opinion. And Thomas is the worst of the worst.


Sadly the white male Catholic members of the SCOTUS have repeatedly voted their ideology. They gutted the voting rights act. All red states have passed hundreds of anti-female laws not just against abortion. All have closed clinics for women just like Texas. They run by a script given to them by GOP organizations like ALEC that is heavily funded by the Kochs and other GOP billionaires. Already the court has given corporations religious rights to decide their female worker's access to health care for reproduction. Of course they took this case to make their ideology legal. Wake up. This is where we are long down the road to a "Christian" nation that is anti-Constitutiion, anti-democracy, anti-women and anti-decency. If we did not have a right-wing media and a fascist lying media like FOX/right-wing radio, you would know this. Plus all those who actually vote for them and support the revolution away from American values and the law..


Agree -- and just want to remind us all that some time ago, women's groups (NOW) had appealed to the US Supreme Court to apply the RICO laws in response to attacks on women's clinics - and they were denied . . . ultimately.

Women's groups have for decades been saying that the "pro-life" violence is connected to White Supremacists -- and the Southern Poverty Law Center has confirmed that previously -- and recently re-confirmed that alliance. At least two of the murderers of doctors at women's clinics were identified as part of White Supremacist movement.

And the law seems pretty clear --
Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, 547 U.S. 9 (2006), was a lengthy and high-profile U.S. legal case interpreting and applying the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO): a law originally drafted to combat the mafia and organized crime, the Hobbs Act: an anti-extortion law prohibiting interference with commerce by violence or threat of violence,[1] and the Travel Act: a law prohibiting interstate travel in support of racketeering.[2]

Also interesting --
Consolidation and rulings[edit]

The Circuit and Supreme courts heard appeals and the matter was eventually consolidated with National Organization for Women et al. v. Operation Rescue. The case was argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on three separate occasions. A 2003 ruling that non-economic violence does not violate the RICO Act left other federal charges intact, including associated monetary damages and a national injunction against interference with abortion clinic operations, but the entire matter remained unsettled until the final decision in 2006 when the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in favor of Scheidler and PLAN (see below).

The case was also notable for the legal skills at the disposal of and displayed by the National Organization for Women.[3]

Further --
In 1997, class-action status was granted by the district court, certifying NOW as representing the class of all women seeking reproductive health care. In 1998, Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue who was facing over $100,000 in costs from other abortion clinic-related charges, settled the case against him, agreeing to a permanent personal injunction.

Also 1998, as the Supreme Court summarizes: [1]
After a 7-week trial, a six-member jury concluded that petitioners violated the civil provisions of RICO. By answering a series of special interrogatory questions, the jury found, inter alia, that petitioners' alleged "pattern of racketeering activity" included 21 violations of the Hobbs Act, 18 U. S. C. §1951; 25 violations of state extortion law; 25 instances of attempting or conspiring to commit either federal or state extortion; 23 violations of the Travel Act, 18 U. S. C. §1952; and 23 instances of attempting to violate the Travel Act. The jury awarded $31,455.64 to respondent, the National Women's Health Organization of Delaware, Inc., and $54,471.28 to the National Women's Health Organization of Summit, Inc. These damages were trebled pursuant to §1964(c). Additionally, the District Court entered a permanent nationwide injunction prohibiting petitioners from obstructing access to the clinics,

(Randall Terry seems to still be involved and possibly even now more closely connected to White Supremacists?)

I haven't re-read all of this as closely as I should and I've always found the outcome unclear in its reasoning -- and perhaps that's the intent?


Oatstraw --
No, I think the framing here is all wrong. This is not about men oppressing women. It's about Christianity vs. secularism along with a demagoguery generated for use during election cycles. An improper analysis no only doesn't help us, but divides us. That's the last thing we need more of.

Of course it is about patriarchy -- Christianity is but its tool --
Organized patriarchal religion underpins patriarchy.

But, agree -- an improper analysis doesn't help -- we need to understand problems from the highest perspective. It is patriarchy which invented organized patriarchal religion -- the Old Testament was written to cement patriarchy.

Left this off --
Patriarchy is a political system just like colonialism was a political system.


Don't forget their benefactors expect to be paid off --

Roberts got crowned "Chief Justice" as reward for having planned the fascist rally to stop the vote counting which had been mandated by the Florida Supreme Court in Miami-Dade County.
The near-riot at Miami-Dade Election HQ's went uninterrupted by any Florida police action.
Roberts had brought down various campaign workers and aides from DC -- all expense paid.
There are websites with the photos -- and most identified by name and association.
An important event in putting W in the White House --

Scalia -- probably truly a religious fanatic --
but also beholden to the right wing -- Cheney, of course.
And he also has a great number of kids who need jobs.

Clarence Thomas is the clown, the pervert -- as identified by even his personal friends.
Joe Biden got him the nomination by betraying Prof. Hill's legal team who trusted him in his assurances that he would present the dozen or more females who had either experienced Thomas' sexual harassment personally or who had observed it. After Biden presented
four hours of nonsense by a young AA male who seemed to be there to suggest that Hill
was flirtatious -- and which was based on one phone call -- finally, he couldn't remember
whether she had called him -- or he had called her! But, at that point -- 4am -- Biden closed
down the hearings.
Meanwhile, Thomas had a long term relationship with Sen. Danforth/Ralston Purina and
had done a favor or two in a case against them. Danforth was prepared to defend him even
"if guilty."

Alito --Justice Samuel Alito's Deep Roots in the American Right
The Federalist Society's Leonard Leo steered Alito's Supreme Court nomination through the White House and Senate

Has already done a lot of harm for his benefactors --

as a Supreme Court justice, where he is helping to wage a legal counterrevolution aimed at reversing hard-won advances protecting workers, the environment, and the rights of women, racial and ethnic minorities, and LGBT people.

Among the right-wing movement's key long-term goals—from the Nixon era up until today—has been to rig the system to prevent progressives from being able to win elections and exercise political influence. They have sought to "defund the left" by starving government agencies and progressive nonprofits of funds and by weakening or destroying organized labor, which is a crucial source of funding and organizing efforts for progressive causes and candidates. For example, the DeVos family (founders of Amway) pushed anti-union "right to work" legislation in their home state of Michigan, and the Koch brothers and their political networks have poured massive resources into the political arm of the movement, exemplified by politicians who, like Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, are hell-bent on the destruction of public employee unions.

In Hobby Lobby, the other blockbuster case this week, Alito wrote a decision declaring, for the first time ever, that for-profit corporations have "religious exercise" rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In order to do so, Alito had to ignore common sense (for-profit corporations don't have religion


Kennedy --
He worked as a lobbyist in California and became friends with Ed Meese, another lobbyist with close ties to Ronald Reagan. Kennedy assisted then-Governor Reagan in drafting Proposition 1, a ballot initiative to cut state spending.
Voted with Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia, two of the court's most conservative members, more than 90 percent of the time.

With Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Kennedy contributed critical votes that led to winning conservative majorities in cases limiting congressional authority under the commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States and striking down portions of gun-control legislation. In subsequent years, however, his decisions were more independent.

Parting ways with his conservative colleagues in 1992, Justice Kennedy co-authored (with O'Connor and Justice David Souter) the court's majority opinion in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, which held that legal restrictions on access to abortion must not constitute an “undue burden” on a woman's exercise of her right to abortion as established in Roe v. Wade (1973).

He also wrote the court's decision in Romer, Governor of Colorado v. Evans (1996), which voided an amendment to the Colorado state constitution that prohibited state and local governments from enacting laws that would protect the rights of gays, lesbians and bisexuals and in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) he declared unconstitutional Texas's law criminalizing sodomy between two consenting adults of the same sex.

On June 26, 2015, one day after the ruling on health care, the Supreme Court announced a landmark 5 to 4 ruling guaranteeing a right to same-sex marriage. Justice Kennedy wrote the majority decision.

There is no right wing without Kennedy -- we have to trust that his previous opinions re "undue burden" in regard to abortion hold. Or that his conscience holds.



Thank you very much for this information. I have heard NOTHING of this ANYWHERE, and while I'm not surprised, I am still disgusted and appalled at the way women are attacked, and I am not one bit comforted or reassured by any court decision in our favor. The problem IMHO is that the federal government is ITSELF a racket, and Judges Thomas and Scalia are two of the worst maria-like bullies in its Judicial Branch.


Shouldn't killing your offspring be some kind of crime?


True -- This right wing court is an international embarrassment --
and at its most base is the pervert Clarence Thomas . . . so acknowledged by his friends.

But, there is no right wing court without Justice Kennedy and he has previously upheld the right to abortion without "undue burden" upon the female.

Of course, I imagine it will depend on who his benefactors are and what they think he owes them.

If you want to read really distorted right wing thinking, check some of Alito's "reasoning."



No, not barefoot, just pregnant. Got to sell those ridiculous high-heel shoes at ridiculous prices.



Do you know that females are the majority in every nation -- ?

Or that there are something like 40 million - 50 million formerly living females missing?

Patriarchy -- its violence and paranoia --
has brought the destruction of all Nature - and ultimately Global Warming.


While that said offspring is actually a parasite living off of you, presenting you with a certain amount of risk to your own well-being? I say the human society as a whole ought to be grateful to, and assist in every way possible, the female humans who choose to bring a baby to this world, in spite of the associated health risk that the male humans never have to undergo; but ultimately it should be her informed choice. I do also believe that this choice should primarily be exercised using birth control mechanisms, but the option of terminating a pregnancy should remain available.



Ha!Ha! So true!
Maybe we ought to have a "high-heel boycott" until the Supreme Court reaffirms abortion rights!