Health /

Federal Appeals Court Sends Texas Abortion Law Case to Republican-Majority State Supreme Court


A federal appeals court has sent a case about Texas’ “Heartbeat Act” abortion law to the Republican-majority State Supreme Court.

In a 2-1 ruling on Monday, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans decided that “the unresolved questions of state law must be certified to the Texas Supreme Court.”

“At every stage of its existence, S. B. 8 and its defenders have challenged Supreme Court authority, first by deliberately nullifying a constitutional right expounded by the Court and now, when checked by that Court by convincing us, an inferior federal court duty-bound to apply a Supreme Court holding, instead to question that holding. It is this sequence which called to my mind Judge Wright’s trust that the Supreme Court and its decrees will be upheld by legislatures and courts, not circumvented and enfeebled,” the 22-page ruling concluded.

The decision is seen as a massive blow for pro-abortion advocates, as the state Supreme Court is unlikely to overturn the controversial law.

The so-called “Heartbeat Act” bans abortions at about six weeks, or as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected. It is enforced by allowing private citizens to sue abortionists who violate the restriction.

“Abortion providers from across Texas originally sued several state officials in an effort to block enforcement of Senate Bill 8, which took effect Sept. 1, but a divided U.S. Supreme Court said in December all but one of those challenges should be dismissed. Justices said a more narrow case, targeting the licensing officials, could proceed in Texas courtrooms,” the Austin American-Statesman reports.

“Providers had hoped the case would be sent back to a federal district courtroom in Austin with a history of siding with abortion rights advocates, but it was instead sent to the 5th Circuit, considered one of the country’s most conservative appellate courts,” the report continued.

For now, the Heartbeat Act stands and remains law in Texas.

*For corrections please email [email protected]*

5 responses to “Federal Appeals Court Sends Texas Abortion Law Case to Republican-Majority State Supreme Court”

  1. HerrDoktor says:

    The morality of abortion comes down to whether an unborn human is, in fact, a human. Once that’s established, all the other rules about how to determine when it’s moral to kill it apply the same way they apply to an annoying child in your house, or a homeless guy sleeping rough in a tunnel, or a dude whose elderly parents are living in his basement.

    And, as another astute reader pointed out in another article, it’s chilling that every argument in favor of abortion can also be used in support of slavery (the reason being that it comes down to a struggle between the concepts of property versus bodily autonomy).

  2. RyanShhit says:

    I’ve long been familiar with both sides of the abortion argument. While I practically agree with the right, the whole “not my business” thing overtakes it. I’ve made clear with women throughout my life, where conversation was deemed necessary, that while legally I cannot weigh in on her choice regarding what is equally my responsibility…I cannot in good faith stay with a woman who aborted my child; it would be the end of “us”. And I have always stood by the fact that I was prepared to take full responsibility for any child of mine if the mother was not ready to be one, and I would never seek support. But I also do understand the counter argument of “your body your choice so my wallet my choice”. It’s a hard convo. And I do believe it is government sanctioned murder.

  3. DeceivedZero0 says:

    Tim, you are mentioned in Bryson Gray’s new song…

  4. I really feel like this approach to Abortion is the closest to the right one. It basically requires the abortion doctors (post 6wks) to confirm with both parties that could sue him their intent, and make a decision based on how they plead their case to the doctor for aborting post 6wks. It forces context into the conversation of ending a life after its fully established, and I imagine the doctor can have a legal disclaimer. I could be wrong in that other people could sue (like grand-parents) or even a disclaimer may not be enough (as its established as illegal). It certainly forces the responsibility on the provider and that’s the right center for this issue.

  5. nrol34 says:

    I guess it takes a Mexican vacation, use mifepristone, or a coat hanger. In London, in the 1950s, one group of nurse-midwives reported in excess of 500 births per month in their catchment area. In the early 1960s, when birth control was introduced, the number of births dropped below 10 per month in that catchment. Divorce rates skyrocketed. Sex and its responsibilities became meaningless to a relationship, and so did marriage. Margret Sanger advocated abortion to curve the overpopulation of the oppressed. If the oppressed have unwanted children, the children will not have a nurturing environment and become a burden to society. Die Unterdruckten solten keine unwunchten Kinder haben.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.