John Roberts Brings Back the Back-Alley Abortion

 

Long long ago before the earth had cooled and the dinosaurs were still roaming, the major reason given why abortion should be made legal was to end “back-alley abortions.” This term meant abortions performed in substandard conditions by medical charlatans. Now, thanks to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, once again women can enjoy having a back-alley abortion.

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts joined the liberal wing of the Court Monday in a 5-4 ruling that struck down a Louisiana abortion safety law.

In the majority opinion for June Medical Services v. Russo, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote Louisiana’s law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals to facilitate continuity of care in the event of emergencies has “nothing to do with the State’s asserted interests in promoting women’s health and safety.”

Roberts wrote in his concurrence:

The legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, absent special circumstances, to treat like cases alike. The Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedents.

In his dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote regarding the issue of whether abortion providers “[can] be presumed to have third-party standing to challenge health and safety regulations on behalf of their patients”:

Today a majority of the Court perpetuates its ill-founded abortion jurisprudence by enjoining a perfectly legitimate state law and doing so without jurisdiction. As is often the case with legal challenges to abortion regulations, this suit was brought by abortionists and abortion clinics. Their sole claim before this Court is that Louisiana’s law violates the purported substantive due process right of a woman to abort her unborn child. But they concede that this right does not belong to them, and they seek to vindicate no private rights of their own. Under a proper understanding of Article III, these plaintiffs lack standing to invoke our jurisdiction.

Once again conservatives everywhere know that Chief Justice John Roberts is an imbecile.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 41 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    The 2020 election will be a national referendum on abortion.  

    • #31
  2. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Arvo (View Comment):

    I admit I’m naive and gullible.

    But Roberts has a point, that this law is pretty much exactly like TX.

    And if the question before the court is the same as last time, the answer should be the same.

    Someone needs to come before the court with something different

    Arvo,

    This law asks nothing more than that a major medical procedure called abortion be done under normal medical standards. There is nothing strange or petty about this law. There is something strange about people who are frightened by 32 oz soft drinks not being afraid of a major medical procedure being performed on women by charlatan physicians in sub-standard facilities. Such events have happened so repeatedly that if not for the MSM news blackout we might call it an “epidemic” of dangerous abortions. These procedures might even be done on 14-year-old girls without their parent’s consent or even their knowledge.

    Nothing must get in the way of the unholy holy abortion bandwagon. I for one have watched this crap unfold for the last 47 years. It’s not helping women. It’s not helping America. It’s not helping Western Civilization. It’s not helping the Human Race. To hell with it.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #32
  3. Arvo Inactive
    Arvo
    @Arvo

    James Gawron (View Comment):
    for one have watched this crap unfold for the last 47 years. It’s not helping women. It’s not helping America. It’s not helping Western Civilization. It’s not helping the Human Race.

    @jamesgawron, I agree completely.

    Unfortunately, the justices don’t get to advance their policy preferences from the bench.  Or shouldn’t anyway.

    Like I said, I’m naive, gullible, and pollyannish about the court.

    • #33
  4. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Arvo (View Comment):

    James Gawron (View Comment):
    for one have watched this crap unfold for the last 47 years. It’s not helping women. It’s not helping America. It’s not helping Western Civilization. It’s not helping the Human Race.

    @jamesgawron, I agree completely.

    Unfortunately, the justices don’t get to advance their policy preferences from the bench. Or shouldn’t anyway.

    Like I said, I’m naive, gullible, and pollyannish about the court.

    Arvo,

    So was I. Just keep watching.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #34
  5. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    It was just announced that the US Supreme Court ruled in the Espinoza v Montana Dept of Revenue case.  

    • #35
  6. Arvo Inactive
    Arvo
    @Arvo

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    It was just announced that the US Supreme Court ruled in the Espinoza v Montana Dept of Revenue case.

    Cool

    • #36
  7. Arvo Inactive
    Arvo
    @Arvo

    If you really like geeking out on this stuff…

    https://www.scotusblog.com/category/special-features/symposia-on-rulings-from-october-term-2019/symposium-on-the-courts-ruling-in-june-medical-services-v-russo/

    • #37
  8. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Roberts Is A Coward …. NationalReview

    • #38
  9. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    I like the court’s decision on school choice.  If there is any hope of reversing the brain washing of the next generation of citizens, it will be due to school choice.

    • #39
  10. Arvo Inactive
    Arvo
    @Arvo

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I like the court’s decision on school choice. If there is any hope of reversing the brain washing of the next generation of citizens, it will be due to school choice.

    Me, too!

     

    • #40
  11. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    At least Roberts is able to get some of the court decisions right even as he flubs many of them.

    You can read the decision here.  https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-1195_g314.pdf

     

    • #41
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.