We must take back our Justice System!

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued their first ruling of the term, refusing to block a new abortion law in Texas. That law imposes strict building standards on abortion clinics, blocks abortions after 20 weeks, and requires doctors that perform the procedures to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their facilities. Women's Rights advocates say that the restrictive law will result in the closure of at least one-third of all abortion clinics in Texas, and severely limit access to the safe and legal medical procedures.

After the law was passed, abortion providers sued the state, and Judge Lee Yeakel determined that the measure was unconstitutional, but the case was appealed. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals then ordered a stay of the lower court's ruling, meaning that the law could go into effect while the case was waiting to be argued. In an attempt to block the harsh measures from going into effect, the stay was appealed the the Supreme Court, where all five conservative justices refused to put the law on hold until the outcome of that case is decided.

In both the Fifth Circuit's and Supreme Court's ruling, every single judge appointed by a Republican sided with the anti-choice law, and every judge nominated by a Democrat sided with women's rights. This is the long-term effect of winning elections. For the sake of our Justice System, and our fundamental rights, we must keep the White House, and take our courts back from Republicans.

Comments

Kend's picture
Kend 9 years 10 weeks ago
#1

Although I am as far right as it gets, I agree 100% a women has the right to choose what she does with her body if she wants a abortion so be it. But 20 weeks that is 5 months, wow I have a hard time with that one. A baby can be kicking by then can't they.

30 miles isn't that to far what if something goes wrong? I thought they where done in a hospital. I must be getting old.

Joe Friendly's picture
Joe Friendly 9 years 10 weeks ago
#2

It has not been sufficiently pointed out to the public that studies have shown Federal judges do tend to decide cases according to their political affiliation. Thankfully Tom does point it out clearly happening in this case, with every Republican judge deciding in favor of the anti-abortion law and every Democratic one voting the opposite. This politicalization of the Federal Judiciary is a disgraceful corruption of our legal system. Currently the Republicans are blocking Obama's selecting any federal judges.

Alas, we need to replace our corrupt government with a real democracy and a legal system that actually works to achieve justice

Willie W's picture
Willie W 9 years 10 weeks ago
#3

Aren't these the same people that keep complaining that government needs to stay out of our personal lives?

t-bird's picture
t-bird 9 years 10 weeks ago
#4

Rather than saying "take our courts back from the Republicans" shouldn't we say: "Re-establish the independence of the judiciary"?

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 10 weeks ago
#5

t-bird -- sounds right! Do you have any suggestions how?

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 9 years 10 weeks ago
#6

I might add that the five Republican Injustices on the Supreme Court, all appointed by Republican Presidents, gave us Citizens United......as if the Kochbags needed more help with their government takeover.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 9 years 10 weeks ago
#7

I love the smell of Strontium 90 in the morning!!!
Yeah!!!! About time the Dems grew a pair of balls...they finally went Nuclear. About the only thing that was wrong with it was that it did not include appointing Supreme Court judges in their simple majority rules. Now listen to the big babies whine about the move. Those simpleton cry babies just can't stand that they are not going to continue to get their way all the time. Way to go Dems!!

N Z Sarah's picture
N Z Sarah 9 years 10 weeks ago
#8

Laws will be representative when we have EQUAL GENDER GOVERNMENTS, all around the world. Until then women have no true rights really as all government is decided by a large majority of men.

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 9 years 10 weeks ago
#9

Right on, Sarah. No argument there!

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 9 weeks ago
#10

N Z Sarah -- I agree with what you say. Can you take some solace from the direction our government is moving? I think you should like that Ms Wasserman is heading the DNC, and Ms. Warren is taking on Wall St and the banks.

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 50 weeks ago
#11

I know I'm posting this way late, Thom, and I apologize. I can't fathom why I didn't think of this two & a half months ago when this topic was first introduced on the forum. But I vigorously object to the term "abortion clinic". There is no such thing as an "abortion clinic", Thom; only womens' health facilities like Planned Parenthood (for example) where abortion is but one medical procedure among many provided at the facility. When you use the term "abortion clinic" you are unwittingly spreading rhetorical lies, speaking the language of misogynists and control freaks, those whose mission is to keep women down by denying them these necessary services.

On various occasions, Thom, I have heard you describe ways that oligarchs manipulate language as a means of brainwashing the public. In vivid detail you've dissected their little word games, designed to trigger knee-jerk responses from people for a desired outcome (one that generally leads to humungous profit). But when it come's to a woman's most basic rights as a human being, to control her reproductive life and thus her own destiny, it's more about power and control than it is about money... except, of course, how these petty, mean-spirited laws impact mainly the poor, those who can least afford the burden of responsibility an unplanned pregnancy carries with it. Last I heard, it costs roughly a half million dollars to have a child and raise it to age eighteen in today's economy. That's an awful lot to ask of someone who works for $2.15 an hour plus tips, or even $7 an hour... never mind the question of what this person might want to do with her life, allowed the choice.

Anyway I could go on about these word games. There are other examples I could easily site, other issues they twist and distort. But for now, I've said my peace. Namaste. - Aliceinwonderland

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Through compelling personal stories, Hartmann presents a dramatic and deeply disturbing picture of humans as a profoundly troubled species. Hope lies in his inspiring vision of our enormous unrealized potential and his description of the path to its realization."
David Korten, author of Agenda for a New Economy, The Great Turning, and When Corporations Rule the World
From Cracking the Code:
"Thom Hartmann ought to be bronzed. His new book sets off from the same high plane as the last and offers explicit tools and how-to advice that will allow you to see, hear, and feel propaganda when it's directed at you and use the same techniques to refute it. His book would make a deaf-mute a better communicator. I want him on my reading table every day, and if you try one of his books, so will you."
Peter Coyote, actor and author of Sleeping Where I Fall
From Screwed:
"I think many of us recognize that for all but the wealthiest, life in America is getting increasingly hard. Screwed explores why, showing how this is no accidental process, but rather the product of conscious political choices, choices we can change with enough courage and commitment. Like all of Thom’s great work, it helps show us the way forward."
Paul Loeb, author of Soul of a Citizen and The Impossible Will Take a Little While