Supreme Court won't stop Texas abortion ban, but OKs clinics' suit

The state has placed a bounty, a $10,000 bounty on our heads. It's like a shot in the back to women. It's my goal to ultimately overturn roe v wade because I think the court got it wrong. Then all eyes are on the Supreme Court after justices refused to block the strictest texas abortion ban in august and now prepared to hear oral arguments in a Mississippi case that could overturn roe V wade. In 1973. Roe V wade made abortion a constitutional right after a texas woman norma jane roe McCorvey challenged the state's ban on the procedure. Despite that precedent, 48 years later, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the country's strictest ban on abortion into law. The life of every unborn child. We have, the heartbeat will be saved from the ravages of abortion. It went into effect in september leaving many women over six weeks pregnant, including those who were victims of rape abuse or incest. With few options, Although women receiving an abortion cannot be sued under the law. Anyone who helps her can be. The state has placed a bounty of $10,000 bounty on our heads, but they've now allowed the everyday citizens specifically the very people who stand on the sidewalk and harassed myself and my staff and my providers most times by name on a day to day basis, now have the authority and have been basically deputized to bring lawsuits against us the most pernicious thing about the texas law. It sort of creates a vigilante system and it just seems un american. You don't even have to be a Texas resident to file the suit or claim the $10,000 bounty under the law. You can sue the doctor, the medical staff at the clinic and anyone who drives a woman to their appointment. In response. Uber and Lyft have pledged to pay the legal fees of anyone sued under the texas abortion law, although texas's decision is grabbing everyone's attention nationwide. Republicans have pushed abortion restrictions for years. Now. The Mississippi case will go before the Supreme Court challenging roe v wade In a 5- four decision. The Supreme Court declined to block the Texas Bam. In justice Sonia Sotomayor's dissenting opinion. She called texas Senate Bill eight a flagrantly unconstitutional law engineered to prohibit women from exercising their constitutional rights and evade judicial scrutiny. Abortion clinics were left with no choice but to turn people away or send them across state lines, It will significantly impair women's access to the healthcare they need, particularly for communities of color and individuals with low incomes. In response, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the state of texas. This leaves women in texas unable to exercise their constitutional rights and unable to obtain judicial review. At the very moment, they need it already a texas doctor took matters into his own hands providing an abortion that is now illegal in an op ed published in the Washington post. The doctor wrote, I believe abortion is an essential part of healthcare. I've spent the past 50 years treating and helping patients. I can't just sit back and watch us return to 1972 just days after going public to individuals brought lawsuits against the doctor. In a late night decision, a month after the law went into effect, a federal judge issued an order to block it. Governor Abbott immediately appealed the following morning in May, before Abbott even signed that law. Roe V wade was in jeopardy of being overturned. The Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments from Mississippi's case, Dobbs v. Jackson, Women's health organizations. The law at the heart of the case, attempts to ban abortion after 15 weeks and has been working its way up the legal system since 2018 is my goal to ultimately overturn Roe v wade because I think the court got it wrong. Then the fifth Circuit temporarily blocked that law saying that Roe V wade protects a woman's right to an abortion. The state of Mississippi appealed that decision, ultimately asking the Supreme Court to weigh in which they will in december. His justices decided to take up our case. So I feel like they're going to want to do something. They're going to address the viability, which is the question we've asked them after all of this. Now, they're saying that these same women should not have the right to make this decision themselves. It doesn't make sense. It's it's like it's unconstitutional. It's it's it's just it's like a shot In the back to women. By the end of 2022, the nine justices will announce their decision. If the court agrees with Mississippi's argument, it would reverse a right given to women nearly 50 years ago.

The Supreme Court has ruled that Texas abortion providers can sue over the state’s ban on most abortions, but the justices are allowing the law to remain in effect.The court acted Friday, more than a month after hearing arguments over the law that makes abortion illegal after cardiac activity is detected in an embryo. That’s around six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. There are no exceptions for rape or incest.The law has been in place since Sept. 1.The outcome is at best only a partial victory for abortion providers. The same federal judge who already has once blocked the law almost certainly will be asked to do so again. But then his decision will be reviewed by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has twice voted to allow enforcement of the abortion ban.The case could return to the justices and so far there have not been five votes on the nine-member court to put the law on hold while the legal fight plays out.The court's conservative majority also seems likely to roll back abortion rights in a Mississippi case that was argued last week, although that decision is not expected until the spring.The high court ruling came a day after a state court judge in Texas ruled that the law’s enforcement, which rewards lawsuits against violators by awarding judgments of $10,000, is unconstitutional yet left the law in place.The court fight over the Texas law is focused on its unusual structure and whether it improperly limits how the law can be challenged in court. Texas lawmakers handed responsibility for enforcing the law to private citizens, rather than state officials.The law authorizes lawsuits against clinics, doctors and anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion performed after cardiac activity is detected in the fetus. That’s usually around six weeks of pregnancy, which is before some women even know they are pregnant.The case raised a complex set of issues about who, if anyone, can sue over the law in federal court, the typical route for challenges to abortion restrictions. Indeed, federal courts routinely put a hold on similar laws, which rely on traditional enforcement by state and local authorities.Another issue is whom to target with a court order that ostensibly tries to block the law. Under Supreme Court precedents, it’s not clear whether a federal court can restrain the actions of state court judges who would hear lawsuits filed against abortion providers, court clerks who would be charged with accepting the filings or anyone who might someday want to file a lawsuit.The Texas law was specifically designed to put obstacles in the way of legal challenges, and so far it has worked.Since it took effect in September, the law has imposed the most restrictive abortion curbs in the nation since the Supreme Court first declared a woman’s right to an abortion in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.In its first month of operation, a study published by researchers at the University of Texas found that the number of abortions statewide fell by 50% compared with September 2020. The study was based on data from 19 of the state’s 24 abortion clinics, according to the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.Texas residents who left the state seeking an abortion also have had to travel well beyond neighboring states, where clinics cannot keep up with the increase in patients from Texas, according to a separate study by the Guttmacher Institute.The justices declined to block the law once before, voting 5-4 in September to let it take effect. At the time, the three appointees of former President Donald Trump and two other conservative colleagues formed the majority.

WASHINGTON —

The Supreme Court has ruled that Texas abortion providers can sue over the state’s ban on most abortions, but the justices are allowing the law to remain in effect.

The court acted Friday, more than a month after hearing arguments over the law that makes abortion illegal after cardiac activity is detected in an embryo. That’s around six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. There are no exceptions for rape or incest.

The law has been in place since Sept. 1.

The outcome is at best only a partial victory for abortion providers. The same federal judge who already has once blocked the law almost certainly will be asked to do so again. But then his decision will be reviewed by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has twice voted to allow enforcement of the abortion ban.

The case could return to the justices and so far there have not been five votes on the nine-member court to put the law on hold while the legal fight plays out.

The court's conservative majority also seems likely to roll back abortion rights in a Mississippi case that was argued last week, although that decision is not expected until the spring.

The high court ruling came a day after a state court judge in Texas ruled that the law’s enforcement, which rewards lawsuits against violators by awarding judgments of $10,000, is unconstitutional yet left the law in place.

The court fight over the Texas law is focused on its unusual structure and whether it improperly limits how the law can be challenged in court. Texas lawmakers handed responsibility for enforcing the law to private citizens, rather than state officials.

The law authorizes lawsuits against clinics, doctors and anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion performed after cardiac activity is detected in the fetus. That’s usually around six weeks of pregnancy, which is before some women even know they are pregnant.

The case raised a complex set of issues about who, if anyone, can sue over the law in federal court, the typical route for challenges to abortion restrictions. Indeed, federal courts routinely put a hold on similar laws, which rely on traditional enforcement by state and local authorities.

Another issue is whom to target with a court order that ostensibly tries to block the law. Under Supreme Court precedents, it’s not clear whether a federal court can restrain the actions of state court judges who would hear lawsuits filed against abortion providers, court clerks who would be charged with accepting the filings or anyone who might someday want to file a lawsuit.

The Texas law was specifically designed to put obstacles in the way of legal challenges, and so far it has worked.

Since it took effect in September, the law has imposed the most restrictive abortion curbs in the nation since the Supreme Court first declared a woman’s right to an abortion in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

In its first month of operation, a study published by researchers at the University of Texas found that the number of abortions statewide fell by 50% compared with September 2020. The study was based on data from 19 of the state’s 24 abortion clinics, according to the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.

Texas residents who left the state seeking an abortion also have had to travel well beyond neighboring states, where clinics cannot keep up with the increase in patients from Texas, according to a separate study by the Guttmacher Institute.

The justices declined to block the law once before, voting 5-4 in September to let it take effect. At the time, the three appointees of former President Donald Trump and two other conservative colleagues formed the majority.

��vlog