Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt

PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 8:36:14 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
The Supreme Court of the United States strikes down a law that would have required abortion clinics in Texas to upgrade in order to meet new "hospital-like" standards. Supporters of abortion rights said that the proposed law would force nearly all abortion clinics in the state to shut down, while their opponents argued for women's health benefits. The 5-3 ruling is "the most significant decision from the Supreme Court on abortion in two decades and could serve to deter other states from passing so-called "clinic shutdown" laws" (http://www.cnn.com...).

For some background, in 2013, Texas passed a law, H.B. 2, placing a series of restrictions on abortion clinics within the state. n November 2013, one of H.B. 2's requirement that abortion providers have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles took effect. The law also required abortion providers to meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers and to upgrade their building, safety, parking, and staffing to meet the standards of a hospital room. Over half of Texas' abortion clinics have already closed since H.B. 2. Whole Woman's Health, however, has deemed these requirements unnecessary and expensive as well as an attempt to limit abortion access rather than provide safety to women. This SC decision reversed a decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had upheld the law. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, while Anthony Kennedy joined the liberal justices in the majority (http://www.npr.org...).

As a whole, this is considered a "win" for woman's abortion rights, along the lines of Roe V. Wade. Stephen Breyer stated that Texas' law "places a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion" and that it "constitutes an undue burden on abortion access." "Texas argues that HB 2"s restrictions are constitutional because they protect the health of women who experience complications from abortions," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in a withering concurrence opinion. "In truth, "complications from an abortion are both rare and rarely dangerous."" (http://www.thedailybeast.com...).

Obviously, there are political consequences to this decision. According to the posted CNN article, "even if Republicans were to name that replacement, the court still has a five-justice majority that could rule against abortion restrictions. And if Hillary Clinton were to win, the majority could even grow". Clinton immediately praised the decision, Obama said he was "pleased", Texas Governor Greg Abbott stating the decision "erodes States' lawmaking authority", Paul Ryan was disappointed, Sanders applauded the victory, Cruz believed this was a victory for "abortion extremists", and Justice Thomas (who voted against WWH) believed this was a violation of religious freedom (https://www.theguardian.com..., http://www.usatoday.com..., http://www.washingtonexaminer.com..., and http://www.huffingtonpost.com...). Trump's stance on abortion is murky. Here's the full brief if you want to read it http://www.supremecourt.gov....

This decision is fairly significant in regards to abortion rights. I would like to hear your thoughts on this. Obviously for the main question: do you agree with this ruling? Do you think that this is one step closer to abortion laws becoming even looser? Are you worried about this development? Do you think other states are going to retaliate, such as with further restrictions? Do you think this is going to impact the presidential election to a large degree (specifically support for Clinton)? Are you surprised at any of the Justices' decision? What do you think is next in regards to the abortion debate? Discuss.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2016 8:06:30 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
Trump still refuses to make a comment about the case, but has said that he "promises" to appoint a SC justice that is pro-life.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,393
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2016 8:58:10 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
Pro-life is part of the republican party platform so Trump has to say yes to this.
What happened here does not really change anything.
What is really happening is pro lifers believe that abortion must stop, and if that can't be done then they must do whatever they can in an attempt to stop it. This has to do with morality and the principle that if you do nothing about it, then you consent to it.

Since there is now a pill that a pregnant woman can take to get a safe and legal abortion, I am not sure an abortion clinic is needed. If they were all closed, women could do their own abortions by taking a pill.
If this pill was made illegal, so what ? , it has been well proved that making a drug illegal will not stop Americans from using it, the point is moot.
Actually the morality here Peters is if you would , y'know, just not "do it" until you wanted a baby then you would not need an abortion clinic to take your baby to ,to have an abortionist kill your unborn baby.
slo1
Posts: 4,354
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2016 9:35:15 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
This was a big issue because the SCOTUS required the state to demonstrate how the new rules that were justified based upon women's health actually made women safer.

They completely epically failed, which exposed the conservative government as liers and cheats. Everyone knew it was put in place to force abortion clinic closures and had absolutely nothing to do with keeping women safe. The SCOTUS called them on it and finally we have a precedence that requires justification of abortion regulation rather than accepting the lies of the state.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,393
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 1:15:30 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
It was put in place to close some abortion clinics. Having done that, this has been a victory, and a big deal for pro-lifers.