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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DreamGypsy

(2,252 posts)
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:57 AM Nov 2013

Justices Leave in Place Ruling Against Abortion Ultrasound Requirement

Source: The New York TImes

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday let stand a state court’s decision striking down an Oklahoma law that required women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound image placed in front of them and to listen to a detailed description of the fetus before the procedure.

The ultrasound typically required a vaginal probe and had to be performed even if women objected. Some doctors said the requirement that they recite the description was a violation of medical ethics.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down the law in December, saying it conflicted with a 1992 United States Supreme Court decision protecting the constitutional right to abortion. In their brief to the justices, state officials said the law was consistent with the decision, which upheld a Pennsylvania law calling for informed consent from women seeking abortions.

<snip>

As is their custom, the justices gave no reasons for their decision not to hear the case. Last week, the court dismissed an appeal from a decision striking down another Oklahoma law, that one an effort to limit medicinal abortions.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/13/us/supreme-court-oklahoma-ultrasound-requirement.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

32 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Justices Leave in Place Ruling Against Abortion Ultrasound Requirement (Original Post) DreamGypsy Nov 2013 OP
K&R n/t myrna minx Nov 2013 #1
In other news, new laws across the US require fully-conscious colonoscopies before purchasing Viagra truthisfreedom Nov 2013 #2
HEY ! Don't joke, I have a colonoscopy Thurs..my second. pangaia Nov 2013 #4
Deming Police will be happy to help with this requirement. dbackjon Nov 2013 #12
a urethral catheter.... waddirum Nov 2013 #15
I want a bill where you have to have a proctology exam and a colonoscopy to buy a gun roguevalley Nov 2013 #16
Love it! n/t JudyM Nov 2013 #20
was it unanimous? If not, how many votes were on each side? CTyankee Nov 2013 #3
Rule of four ashling Nov 2013 #7
Why can't these Anti-Choicers mind their own damn business Heather MC Nov 2013 #5
does this invalidate other states' requirements for same? CTyankee Nov 2013 #6
No ashling Nov 2013 #8
No. The decision not to hear a case has no value as precedent. Jim Lane Nov 2013 #9
Interesting Kber Nov 2013 #14
Correct. I believe that Justices sometimes reason that way in voting whether to hear a case. Jim Lane Nov 2013 #17
Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #10
good news RussBLib Nov 2013 #11
Were Scalia and Thomas asleep? dickthegrouch Nov 2013 #13
The winger Justices know.... ReRe Nov 2013 #18
right...and noiretextatique Nov 2013 #19
Just to clarify.... ReRe Nov 2013 #27
agree 100% noiretextatique Nov 2013 #28
Seriously.... ReRe Nov 2013 #29
that was a cynical, racist appointment, imho noiretextatique Nov 2013 #30
I cannot express in words... ReRe Nov 2013 #31
I still despise Alan Simpson and Orrin Hatch noiretextatique Nov 2013 #32
How do Texas women get a ruling to help them? freshwest Nov 2013 #21
DU OPs from Nov 4th regarding Texas and The U.S. Supreme Court on the links below Tx4obama Nov 2013 #23
Thanks, Tx. Can't come a moment too soon! freshwest Nov 2013 #24
Comforting to know that even the current justices on the Supreme Court won't sanction rape indepat Nov 2013 #22
good gopiscrap Nov 2013 #25
k&r idwiyo Nov 2013 #26

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
4. HEY ! Don't joke, I have a colonoscopy Thurs..my second.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:18 PM
Nov 2013

Plus, I am exempt from the law because I prefer Cialis.

ashling

(25,771 posts)
7. Rule of four
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:33 PM
Nov 2013

That number is usually not announced, but the rule of four is that it takes four vote to put a case on the calendar. That means that it was at least 6 - 3. They dont' announce the reason.

 

Heather MC

(8,084 posts)
5. Why can't these Anti-Choicers mind their own damn business
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:20 PM
Nov 2013

How many of them, offer to help a woman who finds herself unfortunately Pregnant?
How many of them have ever been told by a Dr. the pregnancy is not viable?
How many of them have ever been raped and discovered a few months later they were also pregnant?
How many of them have had to live a life where they had to decide between having another mouth to feed or being able to pay for food housing and gas?

How many of them have ever had to face the possiblity of being kicked out of their home for being Pregnant and labeled a slut?

How many of them know what it's like to have their so-called Christ loving church Shunn them for getting pregnant?

And the flip side how many of them know what it's like to have their choices taken away from them and forced to have and or not have a baby?

How many of the have considered the possiblity that better policies relating to healthcare, Childcare, foodstamps, work protection laws, and housing, might go a lot further in lowering the number of Abortions?

And how many of them know what it's like to watch the Bio-Daddy walk out and declare, "It's not my baby" and never lift a finger to help?

How many of them have discovered that sometimes the child-support collection agency causes more problems than it cures?



 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
9. No. The decision not to hear a case has no value as precedent.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:43 PM
Nov 2013

In litigation in another state over a similar (or even identical) law, the opponents of the law could cite the Oklahoma state court's decision and urge their own court to follow the same reasoning, but the Oklahoma decision isn't binding on other states' courts. If the Supreme Court took the case and affirmed the Oklahoma decision, that would be a nationally binding precedent, but not taking the case has no such effect.

It would be conceivable for a different state to uphold an identical law and for the Supreme Court to refuse to hear that appeal, too, leaving in place inconsistent decisions in the different states.

Kber

(5,043 posts)
14. Interesting
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 01:13 PM
Nov 2013

So a justice who supported the law, but felt his colleagues would invalidate it if it were given a hearing, might be inclined to vote to not hear the case in order to keep the effect local.

I hadn't thought through that nuance.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
17. Correct. I believe that Justices sometimes reason that way in voting whether to hear a case.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 02:43 PM
Nov 2013

There's also the more mundane fact that the Supreme Court doesn't have time to hear all the cases that people would like to bring before it. The Justices have to be very choosy. I forget the exact numbers but I think they hear only about five to ten percent of the appeals they might hear. (Their docket is almost entirely at their discretion, with only a very few cases that they must take, such as boundary disputes between states.)

Response to DreamGypsy (Original post)

RussBLib

(9,005 posts)
11. good news
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:53 PM
Nov 2013

The SCOTUS is not using any tool available to chip away at abortion rights. This is a good thing. So far.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
18. The winger Justices know....
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 02:49 PM
Nov 2013

... that if they let that shite stand, the Republican Party would truly never ever win another election. Basically, any law against the right to a abortion is unconstitutional. One of these days (when we're all dead and gone), I predict we will have a Supreme Court that is more female than male.

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
19. right...and
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 04:44 PM
Nov 2013

if they ever "win" on this issue, they cannot keep using abortion to rile up the shock troops.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
27. Just to clarify....
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 09:47 AM
Nov 2013

..."they" being the present right wing majority of "Justices" on the USSC. What was it Republicans used to accuse the USSC of? "Judicial Activism? Real justice, they purported, was somehow left-leaning. Their idea of "real justice" should lean to the right. And in the end (present day) they are guilty of what they accused the court of being before they started stacking the deck. i.e. they are indeed practicing "judicial activism."

This is a direct symptom of psychopathology that directs the Supreme Court today. I'm referring to the psychopath who blames his victim for what he, himself, is in fact doing. It's a tactic the psychopath uses all the time in order to manipulate, bully and intimidate another in order to get his way.

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
28. agree 100%
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 02:03 PM
Nov 2013

typical of the republicon party's lies about, well, everything. they whine about judicial activism, then make extremely activist rulings, e.g., the voting rights act, citizens united, bush v. gore, etc.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
29. Seriously....
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 02:12 PM
Nov 2013

... the court has gone straight down-hill and to the right since GHWB appointed and the Senate confirmed Mr Long dong silver himself, Clarence Thomas.

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
30. that was a cynical, racist appointment, imho
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 02:23 PM
Nov 2013

a real slap in the face to african-americans, and a complete dis to thurgood marshall's legacy. slappy isn't fit to touch the hem of marshall's robe.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
31. I cannot express in words...
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 02:29 PM
Nov 2013

... how that all affected me. I was sick at my stomach over it for weeks. Gave my Senator down the road for it too. (A DINO, who officially change parties soon thereafter [Richard Shelby]). grrrrrrrrr

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
23. DU OPs from Nov 4th regarding Texas and The U.S. Supreme Court on the links below
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 06:20 PM
Nov 2013
Abortion-Rights Groups Ask Supreme Court to Halt Texas Law

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014639269



Texas healthcare providers take abortion fight to the Supreme Court

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023975938




Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Justices Leave in Place R...