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 Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

hlthe2b

(114,422 posts)

3. It has been reportedly discussed as "ridiculous" which is likely what they were assuming the AZ Supreme Court

Reply to lindysalsagal (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 9, 2024, 05:11 PM

Apr 2024

would conclude. But when that is the ONE thing that anti-abortion conservative judges can use to make their finding then of course they will choose not to address that. The MSNBC piece that I saw was focused on the repercussions of this decision, not relitigating the case.

But news pieces the past year or so from AZ that I have seen had largely assumed it would be rendered invalid because it predated statehood.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] lindysalsagal Apr 2024 OP

The law was promulgated BEFORE AZ was even a state. That's ridiculous... hlthe2b Apr 2024 #1

No one was arguing that on msnbc today. They were angry but didn't mention it was pre-state lindysalsagal Apr 2024 #2

It has been reportedly discussed as "ridiculous" which is likely what they were assuming the AZ Supreme Court hlthe2b Apr 2024 #3