Submitted by: Ron Branson
National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
"No person... shall be deprived of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law..."
Fifth Amendment of U.S. Constitution
Most all of us are familiar with the Fifth
Amendment of the United States in its pronouncement that no
person may be deprived of life without due process of law, but
leave it to the courts to turn this argument around and make
it a constitutional right to kill the unborn without due
process of law. Our federal government is unquestionably one
of limited power pursuant to the Constitution, stating if the
Constitution does not authorize a particular act, nor prohibit
such act to the states, such rights then are preserved to the
states and to the People respectively. Tenth Amendment of the
U.S. Constitution.
We just recently experienced a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that underscored this mandate in a decision on homosexuality in which the Court stated that same sex marriages is a matter of state's rights that must be left to the particular state to legislate for themselves.
Now the Legislature of North Dakota has just recently passed a law, House Bill 1456, that establishes that no person may kill an unborn child after that child has reached a certain time in gestation in the womb. But such law was no sooner passed by the State Legislature that it came under challenged that such law is unconstitutional pursuant a to judicially pronounced constitutional right to terminate life without due process of law.
So the right to life, which has now the right to death, has now entered the judicial system, to be ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. It is The Right To Life v. The Right to Death. Witness the beginning of this battle in the story below.
Ron Branson
National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
We just recently experienced a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that underscored this mandate in a decision on homosexuality in which the Court stated that same sex marriages is a matter of state's rights that must be left to the particular state to legislate for themselves.
Now the Legislature of North Dakota has just recently passed a law, House Bill 1456, that establishes that no person may kill an unborn child after that child has reached a certain time in gestation in the womb. But such law was no sooner passed by the State Legislature that it came under challenged that such law is unconstitutional pursuant a to judicially pronounced constitutional right to terminate life without due process of law.
So the right to life, which has now the right to death, has now entered the judicial system, to be ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. It is The Right To Life v. The Right to Death. Witness the beginning of this battle in the story below.
Ron Branson
National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
* * *
http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/latest-national/latest-national-news/44564-federal-judge-in-north-dakota-blocks-the-nation-s-earliest-and-most-extreme-abortion-ban.html
Federal Judge in North Dakota Blocks the Nation's Earliest and Most Extreme Abortion Ban
22 Jul 2013
Judge calls law banning abortion as early as six weeks “clearly invalid and unconstitutional” under U.S. Supreme Court precedent
Washington, DC--(ENEWSPF)--July 22, 2013. A federal judge ruled today that North Dakota's law banning abortion as early as six weeks of pregnancy—before many women even know they are pregnant—cannot take effect while the legal challenge brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights, on behalf of the state's only abortion clinic, is ongoing.
According to U.S. District Judge Daniel L. Hovland's ruling
today:
"The State has extended an invitation to an expensive court
battle over a law restricting abortions that is a blatant
violation of the constitutional guarantees afforded to all
women. The United States Supreme Court has unequivocally said
that no state may deprive a woman of the choice to terminate her
pregnancy at a point prior to viability. North Dakota House Bill
1456 is clearly unconstitutional under an unbroken stream of
United States Supreme Court authority."
Said Bebe Anderson, director of the U.S. Legal Program at
the Center for Reproductive Rights:
"The nation's most extreme abortion ban has been blocked,
and the message to hostile politicians could not be clearer: the
rights of women guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution and
protected by 40 years of Supreme Court precedent cannot be
legislated away.
"Today's decision ensures for the moment that the women of
North Dakota won't need to worry whether they will still have
the same constitutionally protected rights as women living in
other parts of the United States.
"For the last four decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has
consistently recognized a woman's right under the U.S.
Constitution to make her own reproductive health care decisions,
and we are confident that the courts will continue to affirm
that fundamental right as this legal battle continues."
The Center for Reproductive Rights filed the lawsuit, MKB
Management, Inc. v. Burdick, in federal court in June 2013 on
behalf of the Red River Women's Clinic—North Dakota's only
abortion clinic—and its medical director. Red River Women's
Clinic provides a range of reproductive health services to women
in North Dakota, as well as to women who travel from neighboring
states like South Dakota and Minnesota.
The Center also took legal action in May 2013 to block North
Dakota Senate Bill 2305, a 2013 bill designed to shut down Red
River Women's Clinic and effectively end safe and legal abortion
in the state by imposing medically unwarranted requirements that
any physician performing abortions in the state must have
admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.
Source: http://reproductiverights.org
No comments:
Post a Comment