The court held that the policy does not violate the Equal Protection Clause, the Affordable Care Act, or the Medicaid Act.

West Virginia legislators have introduced Senate Bill 921 — which would permanently ban Medicaid funding for gender transition procedures and abortions and cut off state contracts with providers who offer them.

The bill was introduced by Senators Rose, Bartlett, M. Maynard, Rucker, Taylor, and Z. Maynard and has been referred to the Senate Committee on Health and Human Resources.

Continue reading HERE

Source: https://www.wdtv.com/2026/03/10/west-virginia-moves-block-medicaid-funding-gender-surgeries-abortions/?fbclid=IwY2xjawQhWQxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEe4j_pnd37expc1LaOuxxVPlRWpw2wvb_4yD-Ea8bB90dYdv_zFKJ6B_gVttc_aem_HdGtJBCam5pUSX2pqOZFrw

The post West Virginia moves to block Medicaid funding for gender surgeries, abortions first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post EU votes in favour of classifying abortion access as a fundamental right first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

President Biden’s administration is bracing for a wave of violence when the Supreme Court rules on Roe v. Wade in June, Fox News confirmed Wednesday.

A May 13 memo from the Department of Homeland Security details ongoing investigations into threats to “burn down or storm” the Supreme Court building. Threats against the court arose last month after a draft majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade leaked to the press. The Supreme Court is expected to hand down the ruling next month. Axios first reported on the memo.

SENATE FAILS TO ADVANCE BILL TO GUARANTEE ABORTION ACCESS NATIONWIDE
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-fails-advance-bill-guarantee-abortion-access-nationwide

The court’s conservative justices have already faced targeted protests outside their homes following the leak. The DHS memo reportedly says those protests “are likely to persist and may increase leading up to and following the issuing of the Court’s official ruling.”

The memo goes on to clarify that rhetoric supporting violent extremism does not itself constitute extremism.

“The mere advocacy of political or social positions, political activism, use of strong rhetoric, or generalized philosophic embrace of violent tactics does not constitute domestic violent extremism or illegal activity and is constitutionally protected,” the memo reportedly reads.

“DHS is committed to protecting Americans’ freedom of speech and other civil rights and civil liberties, including the right to peacefully protest,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox News. “DHS is also committed to working with our partners across every level of government and the private sector to share timely information and intelligence, prevent all forms of violence, and to support law enforcement efforts to keep our communities safe.”

The Senate unanimously voted to beef up security for justices following last month’s leak. The legislation allows Supreme Court police to arrest individuals who interfere with the court’s ability to perform its duties, and also creates a criminal penalty for individuals who impede or obstruct those duties.

“Attempts to intimidate Supreme Court Justices by the Radical Left are sadly nothing new, but dangerous nonetheless,” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who introduced the legislation, said in a statement at the time. “We must protect the Justices and their families in case these protests do turn violent.”

PRESIDENT BIDEN ‘STRONGLY CONDEMNS’ MOLOTOV COCKTAIL ATTACK ON WISCONSIN ANTI-ABORTION GROUP
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-condemns-molotov-cocktail-attack-wisconsin-anti-abortion-group

The U.S. has already seen examples of pro-choice violence in the wake of the leak, with an unknown assailant throwing a Molotov cocktail through the window of a Wisconsin pro-life group in early May.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-administration-memo-roe-v-wade-violence

The post Roe v. Wade ruling has Biden administration bracing for nationwide wave of violence first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

There has to be an explanation for the attack on the very core of what made America a great country.  A possible answer is, they’re just trying to tick us off.  The speeches, the decisions, the whimsical  creation of a truth governance.  The appointment of a truly comical figure, one who has humiliated herself publicly on many an occasion, and been flat wrong in public pronouncements.  But then again, she says what her employers want us to hear.

We can only assume the ludicrous move was an attempt to calm the hurt feelings of those who have seen themselves losing control.  If twitter won’t brand, ban, and de-platform the purveyors of “misinformation,” at least the state is moving in to fill the void.  That ought to fix the ultra-whack jobs who think free speech should be allowed.  The Constitution itself has become the enemy, and all attempts to align with it must be stopped!

It’s an obvious response to the purchase of twitter, and the bitter tears.  A stranger female couldn’t have been chosen to head up the new bureau .  We know it, and they know we know it.  That’s why the obvious conclusion is that they’re just trying to irritate us.  We’ve been irritable about the obvious corruption too many times.  This time we have to recognize it for what it is, an obvious ploy that has no chance of passing Constitutional muster.  The great villains of history have all employed such an agency, and this one will be ridiculed, lampooned and ignored.

Everything is settled science, and we’ll either acknowledge that 2+2 equals five, or suffer the wrath of agencies corrupted to protect the establishment.  They know global warming doesn’t hold water.  That’s why they won’t discuss it further.  Especially after the main “scientists” got caught making up the “proof.”  If you’re a “denier,” you can’t be a serious individual.  Who comes up with these monikers?  It wouldn’t matter, except the media repeats terms that are meant to demean.  They’ve stopped trying to prove their point.

The life-blood of the economy is oil.  It’s in almost everything, to one degree or another.  So that’s been made the enemy.  It’s destroying the planet!  They’ve got to stamp out oil production to save the planet.  It defies imagination.  Words that can’t be said unfortunately come to mind.

The same thing happened with religion a long time ago.  A party line has been established, and any variance with it will result in instant dismissal.  It’s such a joke.  Empty churches are thriving because they’re getting paid to settle migrants.  They make them disappear, and get paid.   Watching, as I did years ago, one of the famous TV preachers trying to explain the doctrine of the trinity, he fell all over himself.  Finally, in exasperation he said, “It’s a sign of your faith that you believe it even though you can’t understand it.”  Oh, that’s great.  In the statement was the “doctrine” that you can’t be a Christian if you refuse to sign on to the un-explainable belief.  There you have it.  Either sign on,  or you can’t be in good standing with the rest of the believers.  They can’t explain it either, but they’re all about getting rid of you if you won’t “confess” like they’ve all done.  It seemed a small price for admission into the “Christian” fraternity.

Garner Ted Armstrong said that God is logical.  Everything makes sense.  The complexities of nature strain our ability to understand, but everything makes perfect sense.  He controls our environment, regardless of the ignorant rantings of those paid to be lunatics.  If some outfit claims they stand for diversity, inclusion, and are busily saving the planet, it’s time to cut bait.

Monday, May 1 came the revelation that the Supreme Court is about to reverse the federal abortion law.  The one that found a Constitutional “right” for abortion at any stage.  It’s been almost fifty years, and finally a case has been considered.  It’s been opined that the release of this “draft” decision of the Supreme court was leaked in order to blunt the effect, and throw shade on the release of the movie 2000 Mules.  The chief Justice confirmed that the draft is legitimate.  Stand by for the rage of the main characters.  “Pocahontas” nearly burst a blood vessel, she was so mad.  Somewhere along the line the word “doxxing” got invented.  It took place long before the internet, but we’re being told to treat it like it’s a new invention.  Now they’ve published the physical addresses of the Supreme Court justices.  Surely they’ve got protection, but can you imagine the scene?

Apparently this is the hill the idiots have chosen to die on.  The trinity of politics is seen as under assault.  “How dare they!” Kamala demands.  The pretend administration is going to do everything within its power to see that this precious “right,” sloppily asserted amid the feminist wave of the ‘70’s, is upheld if they have to pass a law!  That would do it.  Pass a law, that will then be challenged all the way to the same court.  Now that will have to be carefully written.

It’s a doctrine that justifies the “re-imagining” of the Supreme Court, or at least it’s packing with like-minded nitwits, like the one just appointed to head the truth commission.  Howling at the sky is also a perfectly reasonable option, preferably on the front lawn of a Supreme Court justice.  You can’t underestimate the dignity of the people on the ground.  Incredibly, the red-headed spokes-lady is justifying the “protests” before they happen.  You might say she’s calling for them.  “As you know, the United States has a long history of protests, and we certainly encourage people to keep it peaceful…” So a mob shows up in front of your house, bullhorns blaring, chanting like a bunch of magpies. I think they just proved the opening point.  They’re just trying to tick us off.  Not that some can’t be paid to make a nuisance of themselves.  When someone calls the police, is that what they’re going to be told, “There’s a proud tradition of protest?”

Somehow the whole concept has been corrupted.  What was intended as a conversation with your representative has turned into mob intimidation.  The red head is all for it.  That means whoever is authoring the teleprompter is all for it.  You’d think the sky was falling when the states will call their own shots.  Can you believe the list of major corporations lining up to pay for travel expenses?  It seems like all the big names are hurrying to let us know they too are on board with whatever drives you to distraction.  Make them go broke.  They worship money.  Maybe they’ll change their tune when they realize the majority is not moved by all their self-righteousness.

Mark

Source: http://www.intercontinentalcog.org/fridayupdates.php

The post Weekly Update by Mark Armstrong – 6 May 2022 first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

While Democrat after Democrat has cried out over the possibility a conservative Supreme Court could eviscerate abortion rights, strategists say little is being offered in terms of a clear way to fight back.

Some also say the party wasn’t ready for something that was clearly coming down the pike.

“Why are we so behind the curve on this? Where is the plan? We knew this was coming in theory since Coney Barrett joined the court, and in practice since December,” said Democratic strategist Christy Setzer.

“I don’t want to hear empty rhetoric about how ‘we won’t go back,’ I want to hear that there is a legislative or federal plan to change things,” she added.

President Biden and Vice President Harris have assailed the leaked draft opinion. In an impassioned speech at the EMILY’s List gala on Tuesday night, Harris declared that women’s rights were under attack, previewing her party’ midterm messaging.

Strategists say the rage is real. But they are worried the party has no real strategy.

“We’re all so enraged but now what? What’s the plan? Sadly, I don’t think we have one,” said one strategist. “There’s so much talk of ‘We can’t let this happen.’ But I don’t think anyone knows what to do next.”

There are significant limits to what the White House and Democrats in Congress can do if the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade and GOP states begin to outlaw abortion rights.

Previous efforts to codify abortion rights into law have failed and Democrats do not have the votes in Congress to overcome a filibuster.

“I think their options are very limited, and what I’ve been advising is for the White House to focus on winnable battles,” said Lawrence Gostin, a public health law professor at Georgetown University.

While some progressive Democrats have renewed a push to do away with the legislative filibuster, Biden isn’t joining that effort – at least not yet. Instead, he’s called on voters to elect more pro-abortion Democrats to Congress, a message echoed throughout his administration.

Democrats may not even have 50 votes to codify abortion rights. Sen. Joe Manchin (R-W.Va.), who describes himself as a pro-life Democrat, voted against advancing the Women’s Health Protection Act earlier this year.

Biden has ordered the Gender Policy Council and the White House counsel’s office to develop a response plan in preparation for a Supreme Court ruling, but it’s too early to know what that plan will entail. Any steps could also face legal challenges from Republican attorneys general.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Wednesday that the administration will not release its plan until after the final opinion is released, conscious of not getting ahead of the official ruling expected to come over the next two months.

“We don’t have a final conclusion. The Supreme Court themselves made clear this is not the final opinion,” Psaki said. “We are already working a great deal behind the scenes and we will have more to say.”

Psaki said that officials across the administration are focused on helping those who will be most affected by the ruling, including women of color and poorer Americans who will face bigger financial challenges accessing abortions if Roe is overturned and states enact restrictions. The White House believes that as many as 26 states will move to restrict abortion if the draft opinion holds.

Gostin offered that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could prepare a report on the physical and mental consequences for women for don’t have access to safe and lawful abortions. He also said the Food and Drug Administration could expand its guidance on the use of abortion pills, such as specifying where people can safely order them.

He also said that Biden is considering allowing the use of Medicaid funding to pay for time off and travel for women who need to travel out-of-state to receive abortions.

The administration’s actions thus far have offered little solace to frustrated Democrats.

Some progressives are calling for more aggressive action, including renewing a controversial push to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court.

“We aren’t powerless,” Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) said on an organizing call for the progressive advocacy group Demand Justice Wednesday night. “Two things that we must do to protect and preserve our democracy: one, we must get rid of the filibuster and, two, we need to add some seats to the United States Supreme Court.”

Meanwhile, a coalition of organizations including Planned Parenthood, MoveOn and Women’s March announced plans Thursday to hold marches in four major cities including in Washington, D.C., as part of a coordinated effort to protest the forthcoming ruling.

The White House has pointed to steps the administration has already taken, such as creating $6.6 million in grants for family planning services and emergency contraception for people in states with restrictive laws.

“We are going to double down on the effort to make sure that the legal rights of all Americans, women to access the care that they’re entitled to continues forward,” Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra told lawmakers at a Senate hearing this week.

Gostin said the White House was unprepared for the uproar created by the leaked draft opinion earlier this week.

“The leak has really made this an outsized public and political issue even more so than the actual opinion would have been,” he said. “It’s caused a huge political tsunami.”

Source: https://thehill.com/news/administration/3479097-democrats-worry-they-lack-a-plan-to-fight-back-on-roe-v-wade/

The post Democrats worry they lack a plan to fight back on Roe v. Wade first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

What is this, a Biblical pestilence? Did you ever doubt for a moment that there would be “variants,” lots of them? It’s uncanny. Just when the reports were that cases were on the wane we have a brand new global panic. Financial markets are falling apart, travel restrictions are being announced and the WHO is holding a special session. Dr. Fauci will be on all the mainstream outlets with sage pronouncements of sound advice. He’ll tell you what to do, where to and where not to go and what kind of mask you should wear when you get there. Maybe wear the mask while driving alone.

A majority of states are suing the central government over shot requirements and mask mandates. In Texas, the governor issued an executive order banning schools from enacting mask requirements. One court struck it down and has since been overruled. It’s hard to keep up with all the twists and turns over who’s in charge around here. Is it the governor, is it the Judge, is it the President, or is it Dr. Fauci? Be frightened if you must, but these arrogant bureaucrats have grown awfully bold with their authority. Did somebody elect these people and give them unbridled power? In some cases, we’re told, yes.

We don’t even want to know the extent of the anti-racist, pro-global warming mandates being pushed by “elected officials” in the lost paradise of California. No doubt, California has everything anybody could want. Over the years it’s lost its sanity. What a blessed region and a wonderful climate. Unfortunately the people there have had to suffer one indignity after another.

The cities were overrun with “homeless” who could do no wrong. Then a flood of illegal aliens, also immune from criticism. But the latest craze surely can’t continue without somebody getting hurt. That’s the worst thing, and the one thing government won’t tolerate. Violence!!

When we saw some years ago the advent of “flash-mobs,” we knew no good could come from it. Apparently the strategy has been honed to perfection. High end department stores are blocked with cars while the occupants in ski-masks cart away all the merchandise they can carry. No doubt the offenders feel justified. You know, discrimination, white supremacy and racism. Don’t think for a minute that we’ve heard the last of it. What’s next? Armed guards? Mainstream media would be inconsolable.

It’s almost axiomatic that whatever transpires on the West coast is due to sweep the nation if not the world within a couple of years. It will be interesting to see whether the rest of the nation will sit still for that kind of authoritarianism. But here comes FEAR and all the authority needed to manage it. They don’t know yet but they suspect… We’ll have to wait weeks for the details, but they suspect that there may be many mutations, and don’t yet know if the vaccines are effective against the B.1.1.529 out of South Africa.

What happened to the letters of the Greek alphabet? Maybe they were starting to lose their ability to frighten the masses. The new variant has shown up in Israel and in Europe, and South Africa is in the process of being quarantined from the rest of the world.

It’s not exactly burning up the front pages, but massive protests have been mounted all over the world. From Australia to Europe and here at home, people are breaking the rules to let the infallible bureaucrats know that they’re all through taking orders, following mandates or being “quarantined” by “health officials” with an authority complex.

Suddenly news reporters are mostly advocates for the most intrusive of requirements. Just do it! They advise that you’ll only be safe if you do what you’re told. They hope we’ll live our lives in fear, always mindful of the latest mandate. It’s a litigation dream come true. We’ll just have to wait for everything to wind its way through the judicial system. Apparently the Supreme Court has agreed to take a case that has ramifications for Roe vs. Wade. Maybe defunding the police wasn’t such a good idea. You know cities will burn, high end stores will be robbed blind, and it will all be acceptable to the mainstream. They’ll call it social justice, or some mis-nomer.

Officials are arguing about what “fully vaccinated” even means. How many booster shots are we supposed to take before we get the green light. The officials are deep in consultation. May it not go well. As it is, we don’t know if it’s our fault. How corrupt is it going to get before big troubles begin? Or have they already?

Mark

Source: http://www.intercontinentalcog.org/fridayupdates.php

The post Weekly Update by Mark Armstrong – 26 November 2021 first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that declared a nationwide right to abortion, is facing its most serious challenge in 30 years in front of a court with a 6-3 conservative majority that has been remade by three appointees of President Donald Trump.

“There are no half measures here,” said Sherif Girgis, a Notre Dame law professor who once served as a law clerk for Justice Samuel Alito.

A ruling that overturned Roe and the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey would lead to outright bans or severe restrictions on abortion in 26 states, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion rights.

The case being argued Wednesday comes from Mississippi, where a 2018 law would ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, well before viability. The Supreme Court has never allowed states to ban abortion before the point at roughly 24 weeks when a fetus can survive outside the womb.

The justices are separately weighing disputes over Texas’ much earlier abortion ban, at roughly six weeks, though those cases turn on the unique structure of the law and how it can be challenged in court, not the abortion right. Still, abortion rights advocates were troubled by the court’s 5-4 vote in September to allow the Texas law, which relies on citizen lawsuits to enforce it, to take effect in the first place.

“This is the most worried I’ve ever been,” said Shannon Brewer, who runs the only abortion clinic in Mississippi, the Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

The clinic offers abortions up to 16 weeks of pregnancy and about 10% of abortions it performs take place after the 15th week, Brewer said.

She also noted that since the Texas law took effect, the clinic has seen a substantial increase in patients, operating five days or six days a week instead of two or three.

Lower courts blocked the Mississippi law, as they have other abortion bans that employ traditional enforcement methods by state and local officials.

The Supreme Court had never before even agreed to hear a case over a pre-viability abortion ban. But after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death last year and her replacement by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the third of Trump’s appointees, the court said it would take up the case.

Trump had pledged to appoint “pro-life justices” and predicted they would lead the way in overturning the abortion rulings. Only one justice, Clarence Thomas, has publicly called for Roe to be overruled.

The court could uphold the Mississippi law without explicitly overruling Roe and Casey, an outcome that would satisfy neither side.

Abortion-rights advocates say that result would amount to the same thing as an outright ruling overturning the earlier cases because it would erase the rationale undergirding nearly a half-century of Supreme Court law.

“A decision upholding this ban is tantamount to overruling Roe. The ban prohibits abortion around two months before viability,” said Julie Rikelman, who will argue the case for the clinic.

On the other side, abortion opponents argue that the court essentially invented abortion law in Roe and Casey, and shouldn’t repeat that mistake in this case.

If the justices uphold Mississippi’s law, they’ll have to explain why, said Thomas Jipping, a Heritage Foundation legal fellow. They can either overrule the two big cases, Jipping said, “or they’re going to have to come up with another made-up rule.”

Conservative commentator Ed Whelan said such an outcome would be a “massive defeat” on par with the Casey decision in 1992, in which a court with eight justices appointed by Republican presidents unexpectedly reaffirmed Roe.

This court appears far more conservative than the one that decided Casey, and legal historian Mary Ziegler at Florida State University’s law school, said the court probably would “overrule Roe or set us on a path to doing so.”

Chief Justice John Roberts might find the more incremental approach appealing if he can persuade a majority of the court to go along. Since Roberts became chief justice in 2005, the court has moved in smaller steps on some issues, even when it appeared there was only a binary choice.

It took two cases for the court to rip out the heart of the federal Voting Rights Act that curbed potentially discriminatory voting laws in states with a history of discrimination.

In the area of organized labor, the court moved through a series of cases that chipped away at public sector unions’ power.

The high court also heard two rounds of arguments over restrictions on independent spending in the political arena before removing limits on how much money corporations and unions can pour into election advocacy.

If the court looks to public sentiment, it would find poll after poll that shows support for preserving Roe, though some surveys also find backing for greater restrictions on abortion.

Mississippi is one of 12 states ready to act almost immediately if Roe is overturned. Those states have enacted so-called abortion trigger laws that would take effect and ban all or nearly all abortions.

Women in those states wanting abortions could face drives of hundreds of miles to reach the nearest clinic or they might obtain abortion pills by mail. Medication abortions now account for 40% of abortions.

Some legal briefs in the case make clear that the end of Roe is not the ultimate goal of abortion opponents.

The court should recognize that “unborn children are persons” under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, a conclusion that would compel an end to almost all legal abortions, Princeton professor Robert George and scholar John Finnis wrote. Finnis was Justice Neil Gorsuch’s adviser on his Oxford dissertation, an argument against assisted suicide.

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/supreme-court-set-to-take-up-all-or-nothing-abortion-fight

The post Supreme Court set to take up all-or-nothing abortion fight first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Appeals court reinstates Texas abortion law first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

US District Judge Robert Pitman in Austin granted the request, preventing the state from enforcing the Republican-backed law, while its legality is being challenged.

The controversial law prohibits women from obtaining an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy – a time when many women do not yet know they are pregnant.

It makes no exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest.

“This court will not sanction one more day of this offensive deprivation of such an important right,” Judge Pitman said in the ruling.

The ink was barely dry on Judge Pitman’s order before Texas notified the court that it intends to appeal the ruling to the conservative-leaning Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, setting the stage for the next phase of the legal battle.

“Tonight’s ruling is an important step forward toward restoring the constitutional rights of women across the state of Texas,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement.

“The fight has only just begun, both in Texas and in many states across this country where women’s rights are currently under attack,” she added.

Mr. Biden’s Justice Department sued Texas last month and sought a temporary injunction against the law, arguing during a 1 October hearing that the measure violates the US Constitution.

The US Supreme Court on 1 September let the law take effect in a 5-4 vote powered by conservative justices.

The law also lets ordinary citizens enforce the ban, rewarding them at least $10,000 (€8,655) if they successfully sue anyone who helped provide an abortion after fetal cardiac activity is detected.

Critics of the law have said this provision enables people to act as anti-abortion bounty hunters.

The Justice Department argued that the law impedes women from exercising their constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy that was recognised in the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalised abortion nationwide.

The department also argued that the law improperly interferes with the operations of the federal government to provide abortion-related services.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland lauded the ruling as a “victory for women in Texas”.

Planned Parenthood said the preliminary injunction means lawsuits filed under the law cannot be accepted by Texas courts.

“The relief granted by the court today is overdue, and we are grateful that the Department of Justice moved quickly to seek it,” Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson said in a statement.

Whole Woman’s Health, which has four clinics in Texas, said it was making plans to resume abortions up to 18 weeks “as soon as possible”.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, has defended the legality of the state’s abortion law, with this office saying in a statement: “The most precious freedom is life itself.”

Judge Pitman heard about three hours of arguments on the Justice Department’s request.

Justice Department attorney Brian Netter called the law an “unprecedented scheme of vigilante justice” that must be struck down.

Will Thompson, an attorney in the Texas Attorney General’s Office, countered the department’s arguments, saying there were plenty of opportunities for people in Texas to challenge the law on their own.

He said the department’s arguments were filled with “hyperbole and inflammatory rhetoric”.

This case is part of a fierce legal battle over abortion access in the US, with numerous states pursuing restrictions.

US conservatives have long sought to have Roe v Wade overturned.

The Supreme Court on 1 December will hear arguments in a separate case involving a Mississippi law that bans abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

Mississippi has asked the high court to overturn the 1973 precedent.

Source: https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2021/1007/1251233-abortion-texas/

The post US judge temporarily blocks Texas abortion law first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Demonstrators gathered in front of the Governor’s Mansion in Austin to protest against Senate Bill 8, an anti-abortion bill that Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law this morning.   Credit: Evan L’Roy/The Texas Tribune

Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law Wednesday a measure that would prohibit in Texas abortions as early as six weeks — before some women know they are pregnant — and open the door for almost any private citizen to sue abortion providers and others.

The signing of the bill opens a new frontier in the battle over abortion restrictions as first-of-its-kind legal provisions — intended to make the law harder to block — are poised to be tested in the courts.

Abortion rights advocates have promised to challenge the new law, which they consider one of the most extreme nationwide and the strictest in Texas since the landmark Roe v. Wade decision. It would amount to an outright ban on abortions, as the six-week cutoff is two weeks after a missed menstrual cycle, opponents say.

The law takes effect in September.

“Our creator endowed us with the right to life and yet millions of children lose their right to life every year because of abortion,” Abbott said in a bill signing ceremony, captured on videos posted on social media. The Legislature “worked together on a bipartisan basis to pass a bill that I’m about to sign that ensures that the life of every unborn child who has a heartbeat will be saved from the ravages of abortion.”

The governor’s signature comes just after the U.S. Supreme Court said it would hear a case concerning a Mississippi law that would ban most abortions after 15 weeks, and which could lead to new limits on abortion rights. It is the first major abortion case heard before the court’s newly expanded conservative majority, and could have far-reaching effects for Texas, where a pending bill would outlaw nearly all abortions if the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade.

Senate Bill 8 was a top priority for Republican lawmakers, nearly all of whom signed on as an author or sponsor of the measure.

The bill bans abortions after whenever an ultrasound can detect what lawmakers defined as a fetal “heartbeat,” which can be as early as six weeks into pregnancy. Medical and legal experts say the term is misleading because embryos don’t possess a heart at that developmental stage.

It includes cases where the woman was impregnated as a result of rape or incest. There is an exception for medical emergencies.

Similar bills have been passed by other states and held up by the courts, but Texas’ version has a twist.

Instead of having the government enforce the law, the bill turns the reins over to private citizens — who are newly empowered to sue abortion providers or anyone who helps someone get an abortion after a fetal “heartbeat” has been detected. The person would not have to be connected to someone who had an abortion or to a provider to sue.

Proponents of the new law hope to get around the legal challenges that have tied up abortion restrictions in the courts. While abortion providers typically sue the state to stop a restrictive abortion law from taking effect, there’s no state official enforcing Senate Bill 8 — so there’s no one to sue, the bill’s proponents say.

“It’s a very unique law and it’s a very clever law,” said Josh Blackman, a constitutional law professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. “Planned Parenthood can’t go to court and sue Attorney General [Ken] Paxton like they usually would because he has no role in enforcing the statute. They have to basically sit and wait to be sued.”

Legal experts have been divided on the strategy, and abortion rights advocates have said they plan to fight regardless.

Elisabeth Smith, chief counsel for state policy and advocacy at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which has represented abortion providers who have sued Texas officials, said it and other abortion rights organizations are “not going to let this six-week ban go unchallenged.”

Drucilla Tigner, policy and advocacy strategist of the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, said the “governor’s swipe of a pen can’t change the Constitution.”

While the law amounts to the most extreme abortion ban in the country, “abortion is both legal in Texas and supported by the majority of Texans,” Tigner said.

Abortion rights advocates and lawyers say the new law would allow for a cascade of lawsuits against abortion providers that would sap their time and money even if they ultimately won in court.

Family members, abortion funds, rape crisis counselors and other medical professionals could be open to lawsuits, under the broad language in the bill, according to legal experts and physicians who opposed the measure. People who sued would be awarded at least $10,000, as well as costs for attorney’s fees, if they won.

“Every citizen is now a private attorney general,” Blackman said. “You can have random people who are against abortion start suing tomorrow.”

John Seago, with Texas Right to Life, an anti-abortion organization that supported the bill, said he doubted there would be an “overwhelming number of cases on day one.”

Lawsuits might be filed by anti-abortion activists who learned through talking to the woman that she got an abortion after six weeks.

“There’s going to be a lot of different (fact) patterns that could lead to the case,” he said. But the bill isn’t “throwing out the typical way that the judicial system works — there’s still going to be a judge, there’s still going to be depositions, there’s going to be a high bar” before fees are awarded.

The ultimate goal, he said, is to incentivize abortion providers to comply with the law instead of fighting it in court.

They can “easily avoid all of that,” Seago said. “Have a public statement. Put it on their website that they’re not scheduling appointments after six weeks.”

The bill does not allow rapists to sue, but abortion rights advocates say the wording offers flimsy protection as most rapes and sexual assaults aren’t reported and don’t result in a conviction.

Most abortions in Texas were prohibited after about 20 weeks. Pill-induced abortions were barred at 10 weeks. An abortion provider must perform a sonogram on the woman 24 hours before the abortion and give them information about medical risks, abortion alternatives and assistance available to those who follow through with their pregnancy.

More than 56,600 abortions were performed on Texas residents in 2019, according to state statistics, most of them in the first trimester.

Proponents of the law celebrated its signing.

“The Legislature and Governor prioritized this historic legislation, and with his signature, approximately 50,000 precious human lives will be saved in Texas next year alone!” said Chelsey Youman, with Human Coalition Action, an anti-abortion organization.

Texas Right to Life called the bill’s signing a “landmark victory,” but said a more comprehensive measure was still waiting for a vote in the Legislature.

“Texas Right to Life reminds our elected officials of their solemn duty to protect the lives of their citizens, especially the most vulnerable and innocent Texans in the womb. The signing of the Texas Heartbeat Act marks a historic step in the battle to protect Life,” the organization said.

Opponents of the legislation condemned its passage.

Dyana Limon-Mercado, executive director of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes, the political arm of Planned Parenthood affiliates in Texas, said the six-week cutoff amounted to an effective ban on abortions in the state.

“When you factor in the time it takes to confirm a pregnancy, consider your options and make a decision, schedule an appointment and comply with all the restrictions politicians have already put in place for patients and providers, a six-week ban essentially bans abortion outright,” she said.

Amy Hagstrom Miller, head of Whole Woman’s Health, an abortion provider that has four clinics in Texas, said the law will have a “chilling effect.”

Protesters have previously falsely reported Whole Woman’s Health clinics to state health officials for allegedly having the wrong water heater permit, not following social distancing protocols during the pandemic, and other perceived regulatory infractions, she said.

The “false reports disrupt health care services and this culture of threats and accusations is designed to intimidate providers,” she said.

About 90% of women who come to Whole Woman’s Health clinics are more than six weeks into their pregnancy, she said.

Whole Woman’s Health has sued Texas over abortion restrictions, and won a 2016 case that went up to the Supreme Court.

The bill was opposed by more than 300 Texas lawyers who said it undermined longstanding rules and tenets of the legal system, including that a person must be injured to sue.

The law would also let someone file a lawsuit in their home county against an abortion clinic, and stop the case from being transferred to a different venue.

In practice, legal experts say it would be more costly and difficult for abortion providers to play legal defense before a judge hundreds of miles away, and it could let anti-abortion advocates be heard in courts that they think will be more sympathetic.

Seago, with Texas Right to Life, said it “will be interesting to see (how) the other kind of alternative avenues (handle) these debates.”

“We know how Judge (Lee) Yeakel and Judge (Sam) Sparks handle these cases,” he said, referring to two federal judges who reliably strike down Texas abortion restrictions.

Disclosure: Planned Parenthood has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Source: https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/18/texas-heartbeat-bill-abortions-law/

The post Gov. Greg Abbott signs into law one of nation’s strictest abortion measures, banning procedure as early as six weeks into a pregnancy first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.