Supreme Court Rejects Injunction of Texas Abortion Law . . . Media Erupts With Roe Obituaries

For many waking up yesterday, they must have thought that they had a real Rip Van Winkle of a snoozer for the last 50 years.  Across the spectrum, legal experts were declaring the death of Roe v. Wade after the Supreme Court refused to enjoin a Texas anti-abortion law in an emergency filing. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez announced that the Supreme Court just  “overturned” Roe in the order. The mainstream coverage ranged from the outright death of Roe to its being rendered to a vegetative state. Even more reasoned analysis asked “Is this how Roe v. Wade dies?” The answer is no.  This is how legal analysis dies.

Legal analysts once prized our role of transcending the political rhetoric and offering detached and honest appraisals of legal decisions and developments. However, in the age of echo journalism, legal experts are expected to drive ratings and readership with breathless, partisan takes on every story. Some of that analysis constitutes raw conspiracies theories dressed up as legal analysis like declaring that this order proves the “very real possibility in America right now that the federal courts are conspiring against us, against the rights of women, of people of color, of voters, of poor people.” Others cut to the chase and demanded that Congress immediately pack the Supreme Court with a liberal majority to guarantee results in such cases.

The trigger of this apocalyptic coverage was an unsigned, one paragraph order in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson.  At issue is a Texas law that would effectively gut Roe v. Wade by prohibiting abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy.  After Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, laws were routinely struck down if they barred abortions “viability” round 24 weeks of pregnancy.  The Texas law is clearly meant to test the new majority on the Supreme Court in another attempt to overturn Roe.  However, the Supreme Court is already set for such a fundamental challenge after it accepted Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

The order actually addressed a serious flaw in the challenge brought by pro-choice advocates to the Texas law.  The drafters of the law were creative in leaving enforcement of the law to private parties rather than state officials. It allows private individuals to bring lawsuits against anyone who either providers or “aids or abets” an unlawful abortion and allows for an award of $10,000 if successful in such a challenge.

Of course, such a lawsuit will not immediately end Roe v. Wade. It will be challenged on the very grounds cited by advocates. That includes the question of whether Texas is using private citizens to curtail a constitutional right. Those cases will also lead to judicial review. In the meantime, if any state official tries to curtail constitutionally protected rights, they can be enjoined pending any decision. Federals courts enjoin people, not laws, when there are actions that are being taken to violate the Constitution. This order concerns whether a court can enjoin the law before any final review on the merits. Any challenge to the law could be expedited on appeal.

The problem is that the challengers to the Texas law picked defendants (a state court judge and a court clerk) that do not enforce the law. Indeed, they appear virtually random. That is why five justices did not issue the emergency order. However, they expressly stated “The applicants now before us have raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law at issue. But their application also presents complex and novel antecedent procedural questions on which they have not carried their burden.”

Even Chief Justice John Roberts who voted for an injunction with his liberal colleagues admitted that this is a serious procedural hurdle and it is unclear “whether, under existing precedent, this Court can issue an injunction against state judges asked to decide a lawsuit under Texas’s law.” One can honestly disagree with how insurmountable this issue is for the Court, but it is ridiculous to say that it was some manufactured excuse for a partisan ruling.

Nevertheless, liberal professors and commentators immediately pounced and declared that this was just a procedural trick or excuse. Many noted that this is why Amy Barrett was added to the Court. However, these same experts did not make similar objections when standing or procedural grounds were used to protect abortion or other rights. Indeed, the only case cited in the order is California v. Texas where the Court rejected a challenge to Affordable Care Act due to a lack of standing, including Barrett. That order noted that “federal courts enjoy the power to enjoin individuals tasked with enforcing laws, not the laws themselves.”

So the Court was not ruling on Roe and it was not ruling on this case, which is described as raising “serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law.”  The actual ruling seemed immaterial to the coverage as people rushed to ride a wave of anger. It is not the first time that actual orders or decisions seemed immaterial to their coverage. The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin published legal analysis that actually got the rulings wrong in an effort to flog an anti-Trump narrative. NBC’s Chuck Todd previously misrepresented a ruling against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer as not citing a single case despite an opinion with dozens of such citations. The actual opinion was entirely immaterial to the reporting on the opinion.

The order this week was based on a fundamental barrier to emergency relief that was even recognized in dissent. What is most striking is that none of that takes away from the legitimate concerns over the future of Roe v. Wade. There was no need to inflate the meaning of the order when there is a massive threat just behind it on the docket. The Texas law is an existential threat to Roe. So is the Dobbs case now before the Court. However, the press today has little patience for nuance or delay when there is rage to feed.

402 thoughts on “Supreme Court Rejects Injunction of Texas Abortion Law . . . Media Erupts With Roe Obituaries”

  1. Anonymous the Stupid, you are entitled to think as you please but fascists are not good for the little people despite what you think. You also ought to bone up on the differences between fascism, naziism, socialism, communism and capitalism. You have a gigantic hole in your knowledge base. If you wish I will gladly assist you in your learning process. Have a good day.

  2. Svelaz says:

    “Turley is experiencing the alluring thrill of the attention he gets for his columns and the aura of credibility from how many “hits” his blog and tweets accumulates. The attention and “fame” of his “presence” with Trump supporters and their ever going conspiracy theories give him the feeling of importance that he otherwise wouldn’t have without them.”

    You may well be correct with your estimation of Turley. Turley’s blog, I dare say, is hardly different from a blog hosted by Infowars! This deplorable situation accounts for the fact that there are no academics of Turley’s stature contributing to his blog. At least none willing to identify their credentials as such. Undoubtedly, this dearth of academics has to be a great disappointment to him.

    I can only imagine what Turley’s visceral reaction would be were he ever confronted with the many hateful statements and angry threats polluting his blog of which he is unaware presumably because he never acknowledges that he reads them. Moreover, I would like him to try to account for the fact that the vast majority of contributors who gravitate to his blog do not reflect his law and order attitude or share his liberal values! Indeed, it would not surprise me if Turley hosts a separate invitation-only forum to accredited academics given the sophomoric state of affairs of Res Ipsa Loquitur.

  3. First trimester suction (aspiration) D&C, the most prevalent abortion procedure, explained by former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino.

  4. Chief Justice Roberts Identifies Unusual Nature Of So-Called ‘Heartbeat’ Bill

    Roberts in his dissent calls the “statutory scheme” of the law “not only unusual, but unprecedented.”

    “The legislature has imposed a prohibition on abortions after roughly six weeks, and then essentially delegated enforcement of that prohibition to the populace at large. The desired consequence appears to be to insulate the State from responsibility for implementing and enforcing the regulatory regime.”

    “I would grant preliminary relief to preserve the status quo ante—before the law went into effect—so that the courts may consider whether a state can avoid responsibility for its laws in such a manner,” he adds.

    “The consequences of approving the state action, both in this particular case and as a model for action in other areas, counsel at least preliminary judicial consideration before the program devised by the State takes effect.”

    “We are also asked to do so without ordinary merits briefing and without oral argument. These questions are particularly difficult.”
    Edited from:

    https://www.axios.com/texas-abortion-ban-supreme-court-roberts-sotomayor-29e6b7ee-a947-4ef9-a790-35236b474b38.html
    ………………………………………………………………..

    Chief Justice Roberts has never been thought of as a Liberal member of the court. Yet he clearly sees how this law creates a problematic ‘model’ that other states might imitate. Roberts also notes that Texas seeks to ‘insulate’ itself from the very law it passed and therefore shirks ‘responsibility’ for said law. What’s more, the lack of ‘oral argument’ in this case clearly bothers Roberts who fears a void in transparency could undermine the court’s legitimacy.

    How peculiar that Professor Turley sees no merits in Roberts dissent. One suspects that Turley is just an ideologue whose main concern is pursuing cultural grievances.

    1. Follow the science…

      The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg
      Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010)

      Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual

      Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

      In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.

      Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co. ISBN: 0801626137

      Although it is customary to divide human development into prenatal and postnatal periods, it is important to realize that birth is merely a dramatic event during development resulting in a change in environment

      The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, Moore and Persaud, Saunders Company, ibid

      1. “The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg”

        Circles/cycles do not have a beginning. The life cycle of mammals is continuous: living mammals create living mammalian gametes, living mammalian gametes fuse and create a living mammalian zygote, the living mammalian zygote develops into a living mammal capable of creating living mammalian gametes.

        “Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual”

        Indeed. But that genetically distinct individual zygote often has no biological capacity to develop into a person due to chromosomal abnormalities, and other times, it develops into 2 or even 3 people, or it merges in the early embryo stage with another embryo and they jointly develop into a single person.

        “In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

        Now you’re quoting a 1974 textbook (did you omit the year on purpose?). If you want to follow the science, then you should follow current science. Presumably current medical texts talk about the variety of sex chromosome combinations that can occur, the possibility of androgen insensitivity syndrome, etc. Again, the zygote often has no biological capacity to develop into a person due to chromosomal abnormalities, and other times, it develops into 2 or even 3 people, or it merges in the early embryo stage with another embryo and they jointly develop into a single person.

        Your last quote is from the 1993 edition of that text. It’s now in its 11th edition, published by Elsevier, which touts “Extensively revised to incorporate recent research and current clinical practice …,” and your quote no longer appears. I wonder why they chose not to continue saying that.

        1. …..cycles do not have a beginning.

          source? what’s your scientific reference? Please provide author, title, publisher, ISBN…. the usual scientific citation format.

          The phrase, which you changed, is:

          “The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg”

          not circles, but life cycle.

          All life cycles have a beginning, unless of course you suddenly converted to Catholicism and you now believe in the Immaculate Conception.

          Start there. And, feel free to quote whatever scientific textbook or competent medical science publication post-Roe v. Wade, which was, as you are well aware, 1973. The physiological, biochemical, genetic and histological data discovered with regard to human embryology since 1973 has been HUGE but anything from 1974 -1989 would likely be easier for you to comprehend as opposed to something 1990s – 2020s.

          NB: don’t forget your scientific citations

          1. “source? what’s your scientific reference? Please provide author, title, publisher, ISBN…. the usual scientific citation format.”

            Here’s are a couple of examples from undergrad bio courses at Research 1 universities (UT and Penn State):
            http://www.zo.utexas.edu/faculty/sjasper/images/13.4.gif
            https://wikispaces.psu.edu/display/Bio110nk/Heredity+and+Life+Cycles (halfway down the page)

            I’m not going to go hunting for a journal article or textbook right now. As an aside, journals have DOIs or ISSNs, not ISBNs, and these are seldom included in the citation. You also mistakenly wrote “ibid” in your fourth citation; perhaps you were copying and pasting from some context where it would have been correct.

            “The phrase, which you changed…”

            I quoted “The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg” without changing it. If we’re going to discuss it, then commit to not making false claims.

            “All life cycles have a beginning, unless of course you suddenly converted to Catholicism and you now believe in the Immaculate Conception.”

            No, life is continuous. Except for abiogenesis eons ago, life doesn’t spring from non-life. If you think that my statement “The life cycle of mammals is continuous: living mammals create living mammalian gametes, living mammalian gametes fuse and create a living mammalian zygote, the living mammalian zygote develops into a living mammal capable of creating living mammalian gametes” is false, then identify the error.

          2. I should have added: do you dispute that a genetically distinct human zygote often has no biological capacity to develop into a person due to chromosomal abnormalities, and other times, it develops into 2 or even 3 people, or it merges in the early embryo stage with another embryo and they jointly develop into a single person?

            If so, please say why. Otherwise, glad we agree about this.

          3. You said ‘All life cycles have a beginning, unless of course you suddenly converted to Catholicism and you now believe in the Immaculate Conception.’
            Apparently you are under the popular MISCONCEPTION about the Immaculate Conception.
            As a former Catholic who completed his Catechism classes I can tell you that the Immaculate Conception has nothing to do with the Virgin Birth of Jesus. The Immaculate Conception is the conception of Mary in her mother’s womb free of Original Sin, which all humans have inherited from Adam. Mary’s conception was an otherwise normal fertilization of her mother’s egg by her father’s sperm.

    2. Roberts is correct that this law poses very serious problems that have nothing to do with abortion.

      Beyond that he is wrong.

      The court is entangled in problems of its own making, and TX lawmakers exploited those. The right should not celebrate as this tactic is as viable for the left as the right.

      Where a law or action by govenrment is unconstitutional or lawless there should be few if any procedural impediments to overturning that law.

      The 2020 election was inarguably conducted lawlessly and often in violation of state constitutions.

      Yet, the courts universally relied on procedural mechanisms to avoid addressing the actual merits of the complaints both before and after the election.

      Doing so undermined faith not merely in the election, but in the judiciary.

      The way to trust in government in the judiciary, in elections is through scrutiny.
      The judiciary does a disservice when it uses procedure as a means to abdicate responsibility.

      I have major problems with the TX law that have nothing to do with abortion.

      1. Procedure is fundamental to our legal and constitutional system. When someone says that “Where a law or action by government is unconstitutional or lawless there should be few if any procedural impediments to overturning that law.” he is actually arguing for a new Constitution and legal system.

  5. OT: Interview of Gabriel Gipes followed by a video of parents objecting to the school board. Many on this blog pretend this isn’t happening.

    How does he try to change minds? ‘I scare the “f” out of them’. What does he say on his first day. ‘I have 180 days to turn you into revolutionaries’

    Gipes video at: https://www.projectveritas.com/news/breaking-pro-antifa-high-school-teacher-in-california-admits-communist/

    Parents at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=594BEm4gX_k

    One parent complained the approved books were not used in class. Instead teachers are bringing in their own. I listened to the entire video of the parents.

    1. Life begins at conception.

      Follow the science

      Human development is a continuous process that begins when an oocyte (ovum) from a female is fertilized by a sperm (or spermatozoon) from a male. (p. 2); … but the embryo begins to develop as soon as the oocyte is fertilized. (p. 2); … Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual. (p. 18) … The usual site of fertilization is the ampulla of the uterine tube [fallopian tube], its longest and widest part. If the oocyte is not fertilized here, it slowly passes along the tube to the uterus, where it degenerates and is resorbed. Although fertilization may occur in other parts of the tube, it does not occur in the uterus. … Human development begins when an oocyte is fertilized. (p. 34)

      Keith Moore and T.V.N. Persaud, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology ISBN-13: 978-0323611541

      Human oocytes and early embryos (2-cell to the blastocysts) can be analyzed molecularly by use of the polymerase chain reaction, and cDNA “libraries” constructed as a resource for the study of early gene expression. The time of onset of specific genes can thereby be determined and so aid in investigating congenital anomalies and inherited diseases resulting from mutation of those genes. (p. 30)

      Although life is a continuous process, fertilization … is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte. … During the embryonic period proper, milestones include fertilization, activation of embryonic from extra-embryonic cells, implantation, and the appearance of the primitive streak and bilateral symmetry. … Fertilization is the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments, and ends with the intermingling of maternal and paternal chromosomes at metaphase of the first mitotic division of the zygote. … Fertilization takes place normally in the ampulla (lateral end) of the uterine tube. (p. 31)

      Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Muller, Human Embryology & Teratology ISBN-13: 978-0471382256

      1. “Life begins at conception.”

        Estovir, I don’t know why you addressed this to me in this location. Did I say anything that disagrees with the statement?

  6. Turley says:

    “However, in the age of echo journalism, legal experts are expected to drive ratings and readership with breathless, partisan takes on every story. Some of that analysis constitutes raw conspiracies theories dressed up as legal analysis…”

    This commentary is sickeningly rich coming from Turley who stood silent as HIS very own network breathlessly promoted the Big Lie. In a bid for ratings, his network colleagues broadcasted the reckless conspiracy theory that Dominion and Smartmatic developed technology that “flipped” votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden through a method developed with the regime of the late Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chávez. Now, Fox is being sued for defaming Smartmatic and Dominion.

    No matter how often he points his boney finger at Fox’s competitors for engaging in partisan legal analysis, no one will soon forget the contemptible hypocrisy of Jonathan “Fox News” Turley for ignoring his own network’s.

    1. Jeff,

      I hope you’ve seen the light of day to renounce once & for all all you Commie Ways/Leanings.

      I’m glad to see US Law Enforcement is helping to clean up Demonic Satan Worshipping, American Hating Commie Trash inside our other wise once great US Bureaucratic Institutions. And to continue much of Trump’s great works of getting rid of the Pedophiles that still needs to be done.

      ****

      Privacy
      Terms of Use

      Headlines

      [ September 4, 2021 ] VIP Elite Panic As Court Orders FBI to Unmask Ghislaine Maxwell’s ‘Pedophile Co-Conspirators’ News
      [ September 4, 2021 ] Russian Father Who Killed Pedophile Friend After Finding Video of Him Raping Toddlers Might Not Face Prison News
      [ September 4, 2021 ] New Zealand’s ‘Woke’ Prime Minister Responds to ISIS Attack by Condemning Islamophobia News
      [ September 4, 2021 ] Pfizer Director Says 5 to 11 Yr Old Children Could Get Covid Vaccines By Winter News
      [ September 4, 2021 ] Anti-Trump Geraldo Rivera Accused of Sexual Misconduct; Admits to Group Sex with Justin Trudeau’s Mom News

      Search for:
      FBI Agent Investigating Pedophile Ring Is Arrested for Child Sex Crimes
      September 4, 2021 Sean Adl-Tabatabai News, US 1 Comment
      FBI officer investigating child abuse arrested for child abuse

      An FBI agent who oversaw an investigation into a massive pedophile ring was arrested recently for child sex crimes.

      Louisiana investigators found evidence that David Harris, 51, had been committing child sex crimes across three states since 2016.

      Harris is being charged with one count each of aggravated crimes against nature and indecent behavior with a juvenile in Ascension Parish, Louisiana.

      A court heard his case and issued an indictment in August, which referenced two victims under age 17 and sex crimes that occurred in 2016.

      Harris is charged with exposing his genitals to two underage girls on multiple occasions. Harris also had an affair with the mother of one of the girls.

      A statement was issued by the Louisiana State Patrol to Army Times regarding Harris’s child sex crimes:

      “Harris was arrested in Ascension Parish and booked on charges of Aggravated Crimes Against Nature and Indecent Behavior with Children under the age of 13.”

      “Upon release from Ascension Parish Jail, Harris will be booked on outstanding warrants in Orleans Parish for Sexual Battery and Attempted 3rd Degree Rape and warrants in East Baton Rouge Parish for Aggravated Crimes Against Nature, Indecent Behavior with Juveniles, Obscenity, and Witness Intimidation.”

      More……..

      https://newspunch.com/fbi-agent-investigating-pedophile-ring-is-arrested-for-child-sex-crimes/

    2. Commie Comrade Jeff,

      And then there is among likely other ongoing False Flag Cases likel being built, it seems this FBI’s attempted to build/arm/provoke into action another one of their in house Armed Militia Groups is in near complete collapse.

      Yet it seems they can’t get enough of flooding our Southern Borden with every UnVetted 3rd World Sh*thole nations (5 mil+) plus a mass of Unvetted Islamic Nut Job Taliban freshly Armed by Biden/Pelosi/Schumer/McConnell/McCarthy/etc & Theft of our US Armaments headed & aimed at Us now!.

      This isn’t about Trump, those that supported Trump.

      This is about commies consistently supporting Treasonous Sedition & Espionage against we the people’s US Govt.

      And now we can see the Masses of patriots have turned against these Traitors.

      Look, I feel pain having to report some of this about our most important agencies & them have falling into nearly complete corruption, but if they can’t get off the dope they’re smoking, straighten up then our/their whole system will collapse. None of us win anything in that case.

      ********

      Another instance of FBI anti-Trump sentiments rocks Whitmer kidnap plot case

      Agent who called former president ‘a piece of sh-t’ on social media precluded from testifying.
      0:06 / 1:20
      By John Solomon

      Updated: September 4, 2021 – 10:01am

      Article
      Dig In

      The FBI keeps getting in hot water when it comes to political expressions against former President Donald Trump.

      The latest example came when it was disclosed that one of the lead FBI agents in the investigation into an alleged plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer will be precluded from testifying at trial after he used an expletive to describe Trump.
      The revelation late this week is the latest evidence to raise questions of anti-conservative bias or sentiments inside the nation’s premier law-enforcement agency. Earlier, a senior FBI agent and a top lawyer of the bureau we’re caught texting negative sentiments about Trump and his supporters while leading the investigation, now debunked, into Russia collusion.

      Michael Hills, the attorney for one of the six defendants in the Whitmer case, Brandon Caserta, disclosed in court Thursday the prosecutors have decided not to use Special Agent Richard Trask’s testimony during the upcoming October trial.

      Prosecutors gave the defense access to Trask’s social media posts this week, with at least one demeaning Trump and his supporters, Hills told the court.

      Specifically, the post referred to the 45th president as a “douchebag” and “piece of sh-t,” The Detroit News reported.

      Trask previously stirred controversy in the case when he was charged with beating his wife following a swingers party.

      The question of anti-Trump bias infecting the FBI first arose in 2018 when text messages between agent Peter Strzok and bureau attorney Lisa Page emerged showing their disdain for Trump and his supporters on their official FBI phones.

      In all, a total of five FBI employees involved in the Russia case were found to have expressed improper political sentiments, according to Justice Department inspector general.

      “That these employees used an FBI system or device to express political views about individuals affected by ongoing investigations for which they were responsible was particularly disappointing,” the report said.

      One of the five bureau employees, ex-lawyer Kevin Clinesmith who famously wrote a text about joining the resistance against Trump, later pleaded guilty to falsifying a document in the Russia case that impacted a court search warrant decision.

      More links…..

      https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/another-instance-fbi-anti-trump-bias-rocks-whitmer-kidnap-plot-case

  7. Texas ‘Fetal Heartbeat’ Weaponizes Civil Courts In Pursuit Of Ctural Grievances

    Legal experts have told The Texas Tribune that the measure is part of an emerging trend in Republican-dominated governments that find it difficult to constitutionally prohibit cultural grievances. Instead, they empower civilians to sue for civil remedies.

    Jon Michaels, a professor at UCLA Law, points to Tennessee, where students, teachers and employees of public schools can sue schools if they share a bathroom with a transgender person, as well as Florida, where student athletes can sue their school if it allows a transgender athlete to play.

    “It’s a way of back-dooring and winking while constitutional violations are occurring,” Michaels said. “It is compromising democracy.”

    Texas’ abortion law goes much further. Typically, in tort law, which is used to compensate people who have been injured, a person must have incurred some sort of personal harm in order to sue someone else. That’s the very nature of what a civil court is intended to remedy in such a case, several legal experts told the Tribune. Texas’ new abortion law, however, gives that privilege to anyone.

    Edited from:

    https://www.texastribune.org/2021/09/03/texas-republican-abortion-civil-lawsuits/amp/

    If Johnathan Turley really cared about constitutional law, this is one aspect of the issue he would want to address. Should plaintiffs with no legal standing get their day in court??

    1. In 2019, Republican Florida House Speaker José Oliva repeatedly referred to pregnant women as “host bodies” in an interview with CBS4’s Jim DeFede about abortion.

      “It’s a complex issue, because one has to think well, there’s a host body, and that host body has to have a certain amount of rights, because at the end of the day, it is that body that carries this entire other body to term.”

      “As technology moves along, a human body can exist outside of its host body earlier and earlier. And so then one has to think, until what time does the host body have veto power over this other life?”

      “The only definition of science of life is something that grows: From the moment that conception occurs there begins to be growth. And so scientifically that’s what it is. But that’s not the question. The question is: What is the value of that life? And is it subordinate to the value of its host body?”

  8. Turley Abdicates His Role As Law Professor

    Isn’t it odd that Johnathan Turley, a well-known law professor and ‘constitutional scholar’, has yet to express his feelings on how the Supreme Court handled this case from Texas.

    The so-called ‘Fetal Heartbeat’ law is going to affect millions of women all around the country as other Red States race to copy the legislation. Yet the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in a single, unsigned paragraph released at midnight. ..How incredibly arrogant..!

    No arguments were presented before the court. No justices were allowed to publicly question each side. Just a single, unsigned paragraph issued at midnight. And three fifths of the majority were appointed by a twice impeached one-term president who never won the Popular Vote and attempted a coup to stay in power. ..The optics look terrible..!!

      1. This anonymous recognizes very little. That is why he uses more than one identity. This identity is the smarter one.

  9. TEXAS LAW ALL LIES!

    NO ‘HEARTBEAT’ AT 6 WEEKS

    NO DEVELOPED ‘FETUS’ AT 6 WEEKS

    Today NPR expanded on the misleading use of ‘fetal heartbeat’ in the new Texas law. Said term was crafted to be repeated over and over in mainstream media headlines. That repetition in itself serves a vital propaganda goal by convincing the public there really is a ‘fetal heartbeat at 6 weeks.

    Below is an excerpt from today’s NPR coverage:

    “The term ‘fetal heartbeat’ is pretty misleading,” says Dr. Jennifer Kerns, an OB-GYN and associate professor at the University of California, San Francisco.

    “What we’re really detecting is a grouping of cells that are initiating some electrical activity,” she explains. “In no way is this detecting a functional cardiovascular system or a functional heart.”

    Kerns adds that health care providers might use the term “fetal heartbeat” in conversations with patients during this early stage of pregnancy, but it’s not actually a clinical term.

    In fact, “fetus” isn’t technically accurate at six weeks of gestation either, says Kerns, since “embryo” is the scientific term for that stage of development. Obstetricians don’t usually start using the term “fetus” until at least eight weeks into the pregnancy.

    But “fetus” may have an appeal that the word “embryo” does not, Kern says: “The term ‘fetus’ certainly evokes images of a well-formed baby, so it’s advantageous to use that term instead of ’embryo’ — which may not be as easy for the public to feel strongly about, since embryos don’t look like a baby,” she explains. “So those terms are very purposefully used [in these laws] — and are also misleading.”

    Later in a pregnancy is when a clinician might use the term “fetal heartbeat,” after the sound of the heart valves can be heard, she says. That sound “usually can’t be heard with our Doppler machines until about 10 weeks.”
    ………………………………………………………

    Edited from: “Fetal Heartbeat Isn’t A Medical Term But It’s Still Used In Laws On Abortion”

    Today’s NPR

    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/09/02/1033727679/fetal-heartbeat-isnt-a-medical-term-but-its-still-used-in-laws-on-abortion

    ‘Fetal Heartbeat’ follows in the footsteps of ‘Partial Birth Abortion’. The latter is a term that was never used by the medical community. It was crafted instead by conservative focus groups.

    Like ‘Fetal Heartbeat’, ‘Partial Birth Abortion’ was intended as a ‘worm’ that would proliferate through mainstream headlines with the goal of convincing people doctors actually used the term (which sounds totally insensitive, of course).

    1. Fetal heartbeat is meaningless. It’s a metric. Young said it right. At what point can the American population stomach the killing of a human living being? You seem to have a problem recognizing the problem under discussion.

      SM

      1. The Texas legislature disagrees with you that “Fetal heartbeat is meaningless.” You seem to have a problem reading the law under discussion.

        1. I think the topic under discussion is clearly broader than the Texas law. Part of it is not just what the law may be but what it can be and what it ought to be.

          You seem to have a problem reading past the edges of your beloved Fact Sheets.

        2. Anonymous the Stupid, as usual, you change what the discussion is about. There is a question involved. The question raised is when to terminate the life of a fetus. However, that means you accept the fetus to be life. You are looking for justification, so you feel better about the killing. To you it is political. You would kill full grown adults if they got in the way of what you wanted. You are a little Stalin without much of a brain.

          1. Alan, you claimed to support abortion at one point. So apparently you’re not sure where you stand on this. Just blowing with the rightwing wind.

            1. With so many postings from the same Stupid fellow, Anonymous the Stupid, it is hard to keep track. If I made two responses to one question because WordPress was slow, so be it.

              As I said above: “Abortion is an intentional killing that most frequently is unnecessary. There are many things involved with the act, but that doesn’t change the nature of its wrongfulness.”

              I have held one position for most of my life, and that is the opinion above. Roe vs. Wade was a terrible mistake. The abortion issue is not a federal issue. It belongs at the state level. Roe Vs. Wade has had one of the most devastating effects on America because it causes us to focus on the wrong things while dividing a nation I don’t believe you have the capacity to understand that.

              I can’t entirely agree with everything any government does, so I live with it. I do not want post-abortion mothers or doctors tried for murder because historically, abortion has existed virtually forever. I can’t control others, but you feel justified in doing so. That is where we differ. I stay away from using force except defensively. You will actively use force to get your way. Force by the government is backed up with guns, so eventually, you will kill people to get your way. I pity you.

              You demonstrate a distaste for religion. I am not a religious person, but I have morals and ethics that I live by coming from my religious past. You have none.

Leave a Reply