Biden Administration to Sue State of Texas for Not Murdering Unborn Babies

[mystery-ak]

Biden Administration to Sue State of Texas for Not Murdering Unborn Babies

by Collin Rugg
19 minutes ago

The Biden administration is upset that there are not more dead babies in the United States which is why they are suing the state of Texas for banning abortions beyond six weeks.

“The Justice Department could file a lawsuit as soon as Thursday, the people said, adding that the timing could be pushed back,” The Wall Street Journal reported.

Check out what the Daily Wire reported in relation to the Supreme Court ruling on the bill:

The ruling comes 24 hours after the Texas law went into effect on Wednesday morning, banning abortions in almost all cases after cardiac activity is detected in the unborn child. The court’s decision sets up a potentially historic win for the pro-life movement by overturning Supreme Court precedents set in 1992 in Planned Parenthood v. Casey and in 1973 in Roe v. Wade, according to The Washington Free Beacon.

While Texas is not the first state to enact such legislation, known as “heartbeat” laws, Texas’s case is the first to avoid a stay preventing the law from taking effect. The Supreme Court decided in a narrow decision against granting relief to a group of abortion providers in the state. Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s liberal wing in dissenting.

more
https://trendingpolitics.com/biden-administration-to-sue-state-of-texas-for-not-murdering-unborn-babies-crugg/

[mystery-ak]

AFP News Agency
@AFP
·
1m
#BREAKING Justice Department sues Texas over restrictive abortion law

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1436045067182088193

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1436045336649338880

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1436045601209262085

[mystery-ak]

Daniel F. Baranowski
@DFBHarvard
·
2m
Merrick Garland is suing Texas to force abortion! The Pope may be Catholic, but Joe Biden certainly isn't!

[mystery-ak]

Charlie Kirk
@charliekirk11
·
2m
The Biden Regime wants to tell you how to raise your children while simultaneously suing the state of Texas to protect their "right" to kill children before they're born. Stop letting murderers dictate public health policy. It shouldn't be acceptable in modern society.

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/1436045723783606275

[Kamaji]

Well, this will get the issue before the Supreme Court in a reasonably expeditious manner, and there it will get a determination on the merits, which was definitely not what happened with the Court's refusal to grant a stay.

[Bigun]

Charlie Kirk
@charliekirk11
·
2m
The Biden Regime wants to tell you how to raise your children while simultaneously suing the state of Texas to protect their "right" to kill children before even after they're born. Stop letting murderers dictate public health policy. It shouldn't be acceptable in modern society.

Fixed it for you Charlie!

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/EdMorrissey/status/1436046110624190478

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1436058292753731594

[Bigun]

https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1436058292753731594

She makes an EXCELLENT point!

[Fishrrman]

I believe that Texas will ultimately lose in the U.S. Supreme Court on this one.

The Texas law fails to meet even the strictest test of Roe -- the requirements of the "trimester" standard as written by Blackmun.

As I'm sure you know, Blackmun recognized the three-sided interest of the woman, the state, and the child:
- during the first trimester (up to about 13+ weeks), the state could not intervene in the decision of the woman;
- during the second trimester, there was an increasing interest of the states' right to protect the child vis-a-vis the desires of the woman, which led to...
- the third trimester, when the state could intervene to protect the child.

I'm not mistaken, the Texas law seeks to use the power of the state to prevent an abortion during the first trimester, which is clearly at odds with Roe.

Thus it seems to me, that in order to uphold the Texas law the Supreme Court would have to toss Roe, or at least substantially re-write it.

Otherwise, the Texas law will be struck down.

But... I don't believe the Court is willing to throw out Roe, regardless of the number of "conservatives" who sit there now. My reasoning was explained elsewhere a day ago.

I realize this reply won't be popular, but I call 'em as I see 'em.
And that's how I see, and am calling this one.

[libertybele]

I believe that Texas will ultimately lose in the U.S. Supreme Court on this one.

The Texas law fails to meet even the strictest test of Roe -- the requirements of the "trimester" standard as written by Blackmun.

As I'm sure you know, Blackmun recognized the three-sided interest of the woman, the state, and the child:
- during the first trimester (up to about 13+ weeks), the state could not intervene in the decision of the woman;
- during the second trimester, there was an increasing interest of the states' right to protect the child vis-a-vis the desires of the woman, which led to...
- the third trimester, when the state could intervene to protect the child.

I'm not mistaken, the Texas law seeks to use the power of the state to prevent an abortion during the first trimester, which is clearly at odds with Roe.

Thus it seems to me, that in order to uphold the Texas law the Supreme Court would have to toss Roe, or at least substantially re-write it.

Otherwise, the Texas law will be struck down.

But... I don't believe the Court is willing to throw out Roe, regardless of the number of "conservatives" who sit there now. My reasoning was explained elsewhere a day ago.

I realize this reply won't be popular, but I call 'em as I see 'em.
And that's how I see, and am calling this one.

Roe v. Wade has stood for years and I don't see our spineless SCOTUS ruling in favor of TX.

[Kamaji]

I believe that Texas will ultimately lose in the U.S. Supreme Court on this one.

The Texas law fails to meet even the strictest test of Roe -- the requirements of the "trimester" standard as written by Blackmun.

As I'm sure you know, Blackmun recognized the three-sided interest of the woman, the state, and the child:
- during the first trimester (up to about 13+ weeks), the state could not intervene in the decision of the woman;
- during the second trimester, there was an increasing interest of the states' right to protect the child vis-a-vis the desires of the woman, which led to...
- the third trimester, when the state could intervene to protect the child.

I'm not mistaken, the Texas law seeks to use the power of the state to prevent an abortion during the first trimester, which is clearly at odds with Roe.

Thus it seems to me, that in order to uphold the Texas law the Supreme Court would have to toss Roe, or at least substantially re-write it.

Otherwise, the Texas law will be struck down.

But... I don't believe the Court is willing to throw out Roe, regardless of the number of "conservatives" who sit there now. My reasoning was explained elsewhere a day ago.

I realize this reply won't be popular, but I call 'em as I see 'em.
And that's how I see, and am calling this one.

That sounds about right.