Pro-Choice
Related: About this forumSupreme Court Agrees To Hear Case on Texas Anti-Abortion Law
Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Case on Texas Anti-Abortion Law
The Supreme Court announced today that it will review an anti-abortion Texas law that threatens to close more than 75 percent of abortion clinics in the state and deny millions of women access to safe, legal abortion.
Today, my heart is filled with hope, said Amy Hagstrom Miller, Founder and President of Whole Womans Health, the lead plaintiff in the case. Although this is the first step in a much longer process, I am hopeful that the Supreme Court will uphold the rights that have been in place for four decades and reaffirm that every woman should be able to make her own decision about continuing or ending a pregnancy. I have hope, Hagstrom Miller continued, for my staff members, who, for years, have poured themselves into providing Texas women with high-quality and comprehensive reproductive health care. And most of all, I have hope for the families and communities all across Texas who now may be able to get the safe and comprehensive care they need from a clinic they trust.
Last week at its Women Money Power Summit, the Feminist Majority and the Feminist Majority Foundation, honored Hagstrom Miller with a Courage Award. We are thrilled that the Supreme Court has decided to review this politically-motivated law, whose goal is to end abortion access and all but overturn Roe v. Wade, said Feminist Majority Foundation President Eleanor Smeal. Laws designed to force the closure of womens reproductive health clinics are not only discriminatory, they are dangerous for women. The Supreme Court should expose the Texas law, and all those like it, for what they are an end run around Roe and reaffirm the constitutional right of millions of women to access safe, legal abortion.
The Supreme Court will likely hear the case Whole Womans Health v. Cole in 2016. The case challenges two provisions of Texas omnibus abortion law, known as HB2. The first provision, which has already forced more than half of the clinics in the state to close, requires providers to secure hospital admitting privileges. The second provision forces clinics to fulfill costly, medically unnecessary ambulatory surgical center (ASC) requirements.
Both the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have spoken out against both the ASC and admitting privileges requirements as medically unnecessary. Without any medical justification, all these laws seek to do is make it increasingly difficultor even impossiblefor a woman to get an abortion.
. . . . .
http://feminist.org/blog/index.php/2015/11/13/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-case-on-texas-anti-abortion-law/
Kath1
(4,309 posts)WTF? Isn't this 2015, not 1915? Isn't Roe v. Wade federal law?
We need to push hard so that every woman who wants an abortion can have one.
niyad
(119,362 posts)assholes want us.
Kath1
(4,309 posts)Gothmog
(153,868 posts)The Texas TRAP law is horrible and I hope the SCOTUS rules against it
randys1
(16,286 posts)If you think it is bad now, well.
niyad
(119,362 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)being discussed in GD?
Obscure as opposed to the traffic in GD
Do people understand this?
If they did I would hope MILLIONS of us would be SCREAMING our heads off.
The ONLY reason to take the fucking case is to uphold these ILLEGAL laws that VIOLATE Women's constitutional rights.
niyad
(119,362 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)thanks
niyad
(119,362 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)The beauty of it is we are POWERLESS
if those fucks decide to do this, it is done
ALL we can do is change it by putting ADULTS on the court
niyad
(119,362 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)and how the Prez election can result in more of this if ANY con is elected