tazzygirl
Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
They keep trying... and failing.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked the North Dakota law that bans abortions when a fetal heartbeat is detected, the nation’s most stringent limit on a women’s ability to terminate her pregnancy.
Under the law, which had been scheduled to go into effect Aug. 1, a woman could be prevented from seeking an abortion as early as six weeks into her pregnancy if a fetal heartbeat is detected. North Dakota passed the law at the end of March, part of a package of curbs in four laws that passed the Republican-controlled Legislature and were signed by GOP Gov. Jack Dalrymple.
...........
In his 22-page ruling, Hovland said the North Dakota law was in conflict with the federal constitutional guarantee to an abortion. In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade and other cases held that a woman had a constitutional right to abort a fetus before it reached viability, usually at 22 to 24 weeks.
"The state has extended an invitation to an expensive court battle over a law restricting abortions that is a blatant violation of the constitutional guarantees afforded to all women,” Hovland wrote in a 22-page decision emailed to reporters. “The United States Supreme Court has unequivocally said that no state may deprive a woman of the choice to terminate her pregnancy at a point prior to viability. North Dakota House Bill 1456 is clearly unconstitutional under an unbroken stream of United States Supreme Court authority."
........
North Dakota argued that the heartbeat law was constitutional because it did “not ban all abortions prior to viability because abortions can be performed up until the point at which a fetal heartbeat is detected.”
It also maintained that courts have upheld a state interest in regulating abortions -- to protect a woman’s life, for example.
In his ruling, Hovland noted that termination of a pregnancy before viability “has consistently been upheld” in federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Before viability, however, “the state’s interests are not strong enough to support a prohibition of abortion or the imposition of a substantial obstacle to the women’s effective right to elect the procedure,” he wrote, quoting from other federal rulings.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-north-dakota-abortion-law-blocked-20130722,0,7686898.story
The article also states that the state isnt sure if they will continue the fight.
I realize this is an issue that divides many people, but is no one upset over the cost of such legislation in the face of all the other problems we have?
< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 7/22/2013 8:59:19 PM >
_____________________________
Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.
|
Federal judge temporarily blocks North Dakota abortion law - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread