Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NYC Liberal

(20,132 posts)
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:35 AM Sep 2021

Supreme Court denies request to stop Texas 6-week abortion ban, John Roberts and liberals dissenting

Source: CNN

The court's move means that the law -- which is one of the strictest in the nation and bans abortion before many people know they are pregnant -- will remain on the books.

The law allows private citizens to bring civil suits against anyone who assists a pregnant person seeking an abortion in violation of the ban.

This story is breaking and will be updated

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/02/politics/texas-abortion-supreme-court-sb8-roe-wade/index.html



This is a formal denial that was just issued.
38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court denies request to stop Texas 6-week abortion ban, John Roberts and liberals dissenting (Original Post) NYC Liberal Sep 2021 OP
Thanks. Here: elleng Sep 2021 #1
Get the f@$k out of Texas. Kittycatkat Sep 2021 #2
TX every few years whines about seceding. We as a nation should insist they LEAVE!! PortTack Sep 2021 #3
Open up the border with Mexico and let them have it back. roamer65 Sep 2021 #6
With all the sick f#cks in Texas, Mexico might just say "no thanks." alwaysinasnit Sep 2021 #14
"I'm shocked, I tell you I'm shocked" kimbutgar Sep 2021 #4
K and R...Pack the Supreme Court...Overturn this Horrific Ruling...And Biden knows what to do... Stuart G Sep 2021 #5
Easier said than done. Unless the filibuster is eliminated, I am afraid it's over JohnSJ Sep 2021 #15
+1 -K&R onetexan Sep 2021 #21
Fuck John Roberts and his fake votes with the liberals. He doesn't have to get his hands dirty now ZonkerHarris Sep 2021 #7
Sorry, it isn't Roberts on this one, it is trump and the three SC justices he appointed, because JohnSJ Sep 2021 #22
I like John Roberts. Steelrolled Sep 2021 #32
It's a good thing that we withdrew from Afghanistan when we did Moebym Sep 2021 #8
My thought exactly yesterday Ponietz Sep 2021 #10
Unless the filibuster is eliminated, there is little he can do JohnSJ Sep 2021 #23
28 other Repuke led states are in the wings ready to take the stage. burrowowl Sep 2021 #9
Now other states can just copy what Texas did. dalton99a Sep 2021 #11
I don't understand the law. So anyone can look at someone's medical records? Jon King Sep 2021 #12
Apparently, it doesn't matter maxrandb Sep 2021 #30
I'm pretty sure the suit has to be filed in Texas onenote Sep 2021 #37
With this law, didn't TX just codify vigilante justice? slightlv Sep 2021 #13
Maybe I am wrong but could they simply be waiting for some nitwit to actually try and file cstanleytech Sep 2021 #16
The law specifically gives anyone standing. Jon King Sep 2021 #17
Until some actually files such a suit though we wont be able to tell for sure. cstanleytech Sep 2021 #19
Well, what I don't get EndlessWire Sep 2021 #24
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #25
SCOTUS cockroaches come out at night Pas-de-Calais Sep 2021 #18
women need to get the fuck & relocate to a better state than texas ! monkeyman1 Sep 2021 #20
This law allows people with absolutely no standing to sue and win. Kablooie Sep 2021 #26
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #27
No but I heard this law specifically allows anyone to sue. Kablooie Sep 2021 #31
Yeah, but can they do that? moose65 Sep 2021 #34
They can do that ripcord Sep 2021 #35
Roberts facing a full blown overturning of precedent bucolic_frolic Sep 2021 #28
Order (PDF) : sl8 Sep 2021 #29
Real purpose Crepuscular Sep 2021 #33
Do you think Susan Collins is concerned? hamsterjill Sep 2021 #36
Isn't the unconstitutionality of the law self-evident? Shermann Sep 2021 #38

Stuart G

(38,328 posts)
5. K and R...Pack the Supreme Court...Overturn this Horrific Ruling...And Biden knows what to do...
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:46 AM
Sep 2021

And he will do it..

JohnSJ

(91,807 posts)
22. Sorry, it isn't Roberts on this one, it is trump and the three SC justices he appointed, because
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 02:29 AM
Sep 2021

of what happened in 2016

Roberts has been consistent on this. In his confirmation hearing he said very clearly that Roe was the law of the land

If you want to direct your anger at someone then it is trump and the three justices he appointed, and those who refused to vote for Hillary in 2016


Moebym

(989 posts)
8. It's a good thing that we withdrew from Afghanistan when we did
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:49 AM
Sep 2021

because shit like this will be demanding Biden's full attention for the foreseeable future.

Ponietz

(2,893 posts)
10. My thought exactly yesterday
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:53 AM
Sep 2021

Thinking about the domestic issues facing us and hoping Biden was clearing the plate DOJ to go after the traitor-in-chief.

burrowowl

(17,593 posts)
9. 28 other Repuke led states are in the wings ready to take the stage.
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:52 AM
Sep 2021

Burkas for all so-called pro-life women wiling white male taliban ass lickers!

Jon King

(1,910 posts)
12. I don't understand the law. So anyone can look at someone's medical records?
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 01:01 AM
Sep 2021

I must be missing what this law says. A women gets an abortion. Someone, like an Uber driver, says they think she was more than 6 weeks pregnant. So they sue the doctor.

Then what? How would a person's medical records be exposed? A perfect stranger can demand a doctor and women provide details on when she conceived and exactly how pregnant she was? Then the civil court somehow decides if it was 5 weeks and or 7 weeks?

I am completely missing how this will be enforced.

maxrandb

(15,154 posts)
30. Apparently, it doesn't matter
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 07:15 AM
Sep 2021

If you file suit against someone based on this law, if they fail to show up in court to defend themselves, you WIN automatically.

At least that is how I read it. Apparently, you, or the person you accuse don't even need to live in the same county. I guess someone from 2,000 miles away could sue you in their county, and if you don't show for the hearing, they get $10K plus their legal fees.

Oh, and that 10K is the minimum

So, say you're a Texas resident, but you temporarily are working in another state, i guess you could get sued because someone thinks you gave a women at 6.5 weeks a ride to a clinic.

I wonder if any women had miscarriages during the deep freeze in TX this year. Can they sue the energy companies, or all the employees at a power transfer station?

Oh well...ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES!!!!

onenote

(42,296 posts)
37. I'm pretty sure the suit has to be filed in Texas
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:51 PM
Sep 2021

It could be filed in a county other than the one in which the targeted defendant lives. But I don't think it could be filed in another state.

slightlv

(2,623 posts)
13. With this law, didn't TX just codify vigilante justice?
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 01:05 AM
Sep 2021

And if so, what of the rule of law now? Shouldn't we all just go vigilante?

cstanleytech

(26,027 posts)
16. Maybe I am wrong but could they simply be waiting for some nitwit to actually try and file
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 01:34 AM
Sep 2021

such a lawsuit as which case they can toss it out due to the party having no standing for which to actually file it?
That would kind of slap down any such similar attempts in other states to give parties say in filing a lawsuit for something that is none of their damn business in the first place.

Jon King

(1,910 posts)
17. The law specifically gives anyone standing.
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 01:39 AM
Sep 2021

Thats the entire crux of the law, it gives any private citizen standing.

But I do want to see a case filed for a different reason...to see what the court does in regards to medical records. Will the women remain anonymous? And just her records released to the court without her identity? Can the doctor's defense team claim doctor-patient confidentiality. Can the women protect her records? Can the doctor demand the court to release her identity so he can call her as a defense witness, then when the court refuses, the doctor claim he could not defend his case without her identity being released?

So many hundreds of questions about how this can be enforced.

cstanleytech

(26,027 posts)
19. Until some actually files such a suit though we wont be able to tell for sure.
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 01:54 AM
Sep 2021

I do know that at this point I would not object in the slightest if SCOTUS was increased by 3 more seats by Biden.

EndlessWire

(6,341 posts)
24. Well, what I don't get
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 02:46 AM
Sep 2021

is how someone can sue some person who merely drove the car for an out of state abortion? How is that going to work??

This is crazy. Can we expel Texas? They aren't going to understand the petitions to kick them out. They think that is a big threat, but no, we are tired of the diva behavior. Don't let the border wall hit you in the butt on the way out.

Response to Jon King (Reply #17)

 

monkeyman1

(5,109 posts)
20. women need to get the fuck & relocate to a better state than texas !
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 02:13 AM
Sep 2021

they are trying to copy the Taliban look's like to me ! women are not as smart as men ! boy , abbott started a fire storm now !

Kablooie

(18,547 posts)
26. This law allows people with absolutely no standing to sue and win.
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 03:43 AM
Sep 2021

Which could mean a hundred greedy assholes could get $10,000 from each person involved.
And SCOTUS sees no problem with this.

Response to Kablooie (Reply #26)

Kablooie

(18,547 posts)
31. No but I heard this law specifically allows anyone to sue.
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 08:54 AM
Sep 2021

It's to encourage the public to police abortion themselves.

moose65

(3,162 posts)
34. Yeah, but can they do that?
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:01 PM
Sep 2021

"Standing" has a long established legal definition. Can a state pass a law that changes that?

Could Texas pass a law that says that killing abortion doctors isn't murder?

ripcord

(5,037 posts)
35. They can do that
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:14 PM
Sep 2021

The reason behind it is that court challenges are made against the enforcing agency, civilians aren't a part of any enforcing agency.

bucolic_frolic

(42,478 posts)
28. Roberts facing a full blown overturning of precedent
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 06:33 AM
Sep 2021

The judiciary now laced with radicals not acting in the interests of stability. Rule of law manages the bureaucracy and when rule of law becomes rule of the day, you haven't got much.

Crepuscular

(1,057 posts)
33. Real purpose
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 11:47 AM
Sep 2021

Let's be real, the real point of this law is to provide a vehicle that will force the Supreme Court to re-visit Roe & Casey.

The proponents of this law don't give a rat's ass as to whether abortion providers lose these civil lawsuits, the fact is that they won't, as Roe provides an absolute defense for the services that they provide. The point of this law is twofold: one is to bury abortion providers with nuisance lawsuits that they have to bear the cost of defending. Essentially death by a thousand cuts, which is the same strategy that gun reform groups would like to use against firearms manufacturers, bankrupt them through litigation. Winning the lawsuit isn't the point, forcing the defendant to spend a gazillion dollars defending themselves, is.

The second purpose of this law is to force someone who is sued, who uses Roe as their defense, to take the case to the Supreme Court and force them to re-visit Roe. Given the marked change in the make-up of the Court since Roe was originally published, that outcome is certainly in doubt. By forcing litigants to use State Courts instead of Federal Circuit Courts, this law will force the S.C. to take up the case, instead of just allowing a lower court precedent to stand. If Roe is repealed, then this Texas law becomes moot.

Just as Congress passed a law protecting gun makers from civil liability in most cases, it seems like maybe Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Shumer should be taking a long hard look at passing a similar liability protection law for health care providers who offer termination services, prior to the 2022 mid-terms, when they may lose any chance of getting such legislation across the finish line.

hamsterjill

(15,198 posts)
36. Do you think Susan Collins is concerned?
Thu Sep 2, 2021, 12:50 PM
Sep 2021

She was so sure that Kavanaugh wasn’t lying.

Good grief. This is no surprise to anyone. These idiots on the court are crazy ass religious idiots. No better than the members of any other religious cult trying to force its beliefs on the rest of the world. This was their intent from the start and once again, Republicans have gotten their way.

Shermann

(7,313 posts)
38. Isn't the unconstitutionality of the law self-evident?
Fri Sep 3, 2021, 01:47 PM
Sep 2021

I don't see why the burden of proof falls on the Texas abortion providers. You had one job to do SCOTUS.

I also don't see how "complex" and "novel" procedural questions preclude the freezing of the state law. Allow a law which directly affects women's health and wellbeing pass now, and figure out what it all means later??

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court denies requ...