• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal Judge Halts Key Part of Texas Abortion Law...

1750Texan

1750Texan

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
3,780
Reaction score
1,606
Location
Southcental Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Federal Judge Halts Key Part of Texas Abortion Law - ABC News

A federal judge Friday threw out new Texas abortion restrictions that would have effectively closed more than a dozen clinics in the state.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel sided with clinics that sued over one of the most disputed measures of a sweeping anti-abortion bill signed by Republican Gov. Rick Perry in 2013. The ruling stops new restrictions that would have left seven abortion facilities in Texas by Sept. 1. There are currently 19 abortion providers in the state, according to groups challenging the law.

"The overall effect of the provisions is to create an impermissible obstacle as applied to all women seeking a previability abortion," Yeakel wrote in his 21-page ruling.
Click to expand...

Rick Perry and Greg Abbott take another hit.
 
"The overall effect of the provisions is to create an impermissible obstacle as applied to all women seeking a previability abortion," Yeakel wrote in his 21-page ruling.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what the law is about. Good call by the judge.
 
jamesrage said:
Hopefully SCOTUS agrees with Texas on this.
Click to expand...

Hopefully SCOTUS DISagrees with TP Texas and attention whore Perry. This highly restrictive law reminds me of the highly restrictive voter laws in the Dirty South of my generation. Not an outright ban on minority voting but a defacto ban in practice.

It will be interesting... :peace
 
What exactly about the regulations are unreasonable? The only argument I ever see is that most of the clinics aren't compliant and would chose to close over becoming compliant. It's hardly the states fault that the majority of abortion clinics have chosen to operate like back alleys with roofs
 
I hope all laws limiting access to abortion are able to stand, if we can't outright make it illegal then it needs to be impossible to obtain by any means. One of the greatest evils in our society needs to be stopped.
 
Crovax said:
What exactly about the regulations are unreasonable? The only argument I ever see is that most of the clinics aren't compliant and would chose to close over becoming compliant. It's hardly the states fault that the majority of abortion clinics have chosen to operate like back alleys with roofs
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should read up on the expectations. Hospital surgery rooms are required to have certain types of equipment, equipment that is not needed in an abortion center, particularly since most abortions don't even require surgery of any type. And then there is the requirement of abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at local hospitals. Which in itself is stupid as all get out since no one needs to meet some sort of requirement to be admitted to a hospital. But that aside there is the fact that when many of those abortion doctors tried to get admittance privileges they were either flat out denied or the hospitals even refused to give them the application in order to apply to become compliant with the law.

Not to mention there were those that are for the laws that flat out said that the purpose was to close abortion clinics.

And then there is the fact that by forcing those businesses to close it is denying thousands of women the other care that those clinics provided, such as cancer screening, contraception etc etc. Now there are thousands of women that have to travels hours to get that type of care, assuming that they are able to actually travel that far due to transportation issues, work, kids etc etc. And by doing all of this they are actually doing the opposite of what those for the law said that they wanted, "provide better, safer care for women".

Read up
 
notquiteright said:
Hopefully SCOTUS DISagrees with TP Texas and attention whore Perry. This highly restrictive law reminds me of the highly restrictive voter laws in the Dirty South of my generation. Not an outright ban on minority voting but a defacto ban in practice.

It will be interesting... :peace
Click to expand...

I predict that it will be John Roberts who casts the deciding vote that upholds the Federal court decision. Yes, he happens to be Catholic, but I haven't seen him make rulings on the basis of his own religious beliefs.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Perhaps you should read up on the expectations. Hospital surgery rooms are required to have certain types of equipment, equipment that is not needed in an abortion center, particularly since most abortions don't even require surgery of any type. And then there is the requirement of abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at local hospitals. Which in itself is stupid as all get out since no one needs to meet some sort of requirement to be admitted to a hospital. But that aside there is the fact that when many of those abortion doctors tried to get admittance privileges they were either flat out denied or the hospitals even refused to give them the application in order to apply to become compliant with the law.

Not to mention there were those that are for the laws that flat out said that the purpose was to close abortion clinics.

And then there is the fact that by forcing those businesses to close it is denying thousands of women the other care that those clinics provided, such as cancer screening, contraception etc etc. Now there are thousands of women that have to travels hours to get that type of care, assuming that they are able to actually travel that far due to transportation issues, work, kids etc etc. And by doing all of this they are actually doing the opposite of what those for the law said that they wanted, "provide better, safer care for women".

Read up
Click to expand...

The key here is that, although Texas claimed this law was to protect the health of the woman, they were lying through their teeth. Their agenda is to make Roe v. Wade moot.
 
Crovax said:
What exactly about the regulations are unreasonable? The only argument I ever see is that most of the clinics aren't compliant and would chose to close over becoming compliant. It's hardly the states fault that the majority of abortion clinics have chosen to operate like back alleys with roofs
Click to expand...

Can you show a trend in severe complications necessitating such restrictive laws?

I mean we can have laws that say all surgery needs to take place in a full service hospital with inpatient and ER facilities.....can you tell me the effect of such laws?

Makes the procedures with excellent safety profiles VERY expensive and less accessible to those in rural areas. Hey....sounds familiar!
 
Crovax said:
What exactly about the regulations are unreasonable? The only argument I ever see is that most of the clinics aren't compliant and would chose to close over becoming compliant. It's hardly the states fault that the majority of abortion clinics have chosen to operate like back alleys with roofs
Click to expand...

Of course that is not the situation.

My sister just had oral surgery. Joan Rivers had a medical procedure not at a hospital. Neither my sister's dentist nor Rivers' doctor had to have admitting privileges at a hospital to perform the procedures.

All medical procedures have inherent risks...I don't hear anyone calling for all doctors and dentists to have admitting privileges at a hospital to perform medical procedures.

It's a phony-baloney claim.
 
year2late said:
Can you show a trend in severe complications necessitating such restrictive laws?

I mean we can have laws that say all surgery needs to take place in a full service hospital with inpatient and ER facilities.....can you tell me the effect of such laws?

Makes the procedures with excellent safety profiles VERY expensive and less accessible to those in rural areas. Hey....sounds familiar!
Click to expand...

The law was a response to a clinic in Houston that had some of the same problems as the Gosnell clinic and Texas' law is similar to the law crafted in Pennsylvania as their response.

Texas May Have Its Own Gosnell: Houston Doc Accused of Gruesome Illegal Abortions | Video | TheBlaze.com
 
1750Texan said:
Of course that is not the situation.

My sister just had oral surgery. Joan Rivers had a medical procedure not at a hospital. Neither my sister's dentist nor Rivers' doctor had to have admitting privileges at a hospital to perform the procedures.

All medical procedures have inherent risks...I don't hear anyone calling for all doctors and dentists to have admitting privileges at a hospital to perform medical procedures.

It's a phony-baloney claim.
Click to expand...

To be certified by the ABOMS and ABPS you have to have admitting privileges.
 
1750Texan said:
Rick Perry and Greg Abbott take another hit.
Click to expand...

Good! :) Although I think Perry now has more serious problems than trying to prevent women from getting an abortion in TX.
 
Crovax said:
The law was a response to a clinic in Houston that had some of the same problems as the Gosnell clinic and Texas' law is similar to the law crafted in Pennsylvania as their response.

Texas May Have Its Own Gosnell: Houston Doc Accused of Gruesome Illegal Abortions | Video | TheBlaze.com
Click to expand...

He has been cleared, but at any rate, if he had been found guilty, the accusations were that his clinic was not up to current standards. That does not indicate that higher standards need to be in place, just that current standards need to be enforced.

Is there any indication the women have higher complication rates at this clinic?
 
Ocean007 said:
Good! :) Although I think Perry now has more serious problems than trying to prevent women from getting an abortion in TX.
Click to expand...

Such as? If you are referring to his indictment, that joke of a prosecution will never happen. Perry can literally put it out of his mind. Liberals are the most vile disgusting people to bring such a farce into our courts. Anyone who agrees with it i would really like to see expelled from this country.
 
Sabanist said:
Such as? If you are referring to his indictment, that joke of a prosecution will never happen. Perry can literally put it out of his mind. Liberals are the most vile disgusting people to bring such a farce into our courts. Anyone who agrees with it i would really like to see expelled from this country.
Click to expand...

So, you don't believe in freedom of thought. Wow.
 
Sabanist said:
Such as? If you are referring to his indictment, that joke of a prosecution will never happen. Perry can literally put it out of his mind. Liberals are the most vile disgusting people to bring such a farce into our courts. Anyone who agrees with it i would really like to see expelled from this country.
Click to expand...

That may be true, then again, it may not. I'm sure the now EX-governor of Illinois. the former Gov. Blagoyevich (probably didn't spell that correctly, but I'm not going to worry about it) had the same thought, that this "joke of a prosecution will never happen." He was WRONG, and he was convicted. The former Governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnell, probably thought the same thing, and he's currently on trial on charges of fraud and other charges. Whether he'll be convicted or not is uncertain, as his trial isn't over yet.

Governors who abuse their power, who think they are above the law, often make one mistake too many, like Blago and McDonnell did. This time it's Rick Perry's turn. If Perry goes to trial and is convicted, he'll have no one to blame but HIMSELF.
 
Crovax said:
What exactly about the regulations are unreasonable?
Click to expand...
If you have to ask you can't possibly understand.

It's hardly the states fault that the majority of abortion clinics have chosen to operate like back alleys with roofs
Click to expand...
And the reason you would not understand is because you clearly are clueless about the issue.
 
digsbe said:
I hope all laws limiting access to abortion are able to stand, if we can't outright make it illegal then it needs to be impossible to obtain by any means. One of the greatest evils in our society needs to be stopped.
Click to expand...
Are you going to hold your breath?
 
prometeus said:
Are you going to hold your breath?
Click to expand...

Not really, it will happen eventually but probably not until after SSM is nationally legal.
 
digsbe said:
Not really, it will happen eventually but probably not until after SSM is nationally legal.
Click to expand...
What makes you believe that it will happen? If history is an indicator, any and all things points away from your hopes.
Hopes were high among some that SSM will never happen either.
 
Perry didnt abuse his power. Sorry, but its a joke, and i think support for perry will increase because of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom