South Dakota House Passes Bill Criminalizing Abortions

  • Thread starter Thread starter msproule
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

msproule

Guest
With overwhelming bi-partisan support, the SD House of Representatives voted yesterday in favor of House Bill 1215, which if enacted into law will criminalize abortions. This would most likely force the Supreme Court’s eventual intervention and will put the lamentable Roe v. Wade decision under scrutiny.

The bill passed in voting 47-22! :clapping: There is said to be strong support in the State Senate and from what I have read the Governor is pro-life…
:gopray:
God Bless South Dakota!
 
This is stupid. And I am pro-life. The votes to over-turn currently don’t exist on the Supreme Court. If Roberts is as conservative as we hope, we have four votes to over-turn Roe.

What is worse, is this could strengthen Roe. If the Supreme Court were to hear this case when it inevitably reaches the Court, it will strike it down 5-4. Which will just be one more case supporting Roe. They needed to have waited until either Ginsberg, Stevens, Souter, Breyer or Kennedy were replaced by a originalist or strict constructonists. Big mistake, IMHO. Abortion belongs to the states, but a Federal Court will strike this law down and so will the Supreme Court.

Unless the Catholic Faction (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito) can convince Kennedy to come home. Praying for that.
 
40.png
NWUArmyROTC:
This is stupid. And I am pro-life. The votes to over-turn currently don’t exist on the Supreme Court. If Roberts is as conservative as we hope, we have four votes to over-turn Roe.

What is worse, is this could strengthen Roe. If the Supreme Court were to hear this case when it inevitably reaches the Court, it will strike it down 5-4. Which will just be one more case supporting Roe. They needed to have waited until either Ginsberg, Stevens, Souter, Breyer or Kennedy were replaced by a originalist or strict constructonists. Big mistake, IMHO. Abortion belongs to the states, but a Federal Court will strike this law down and so will the Supreme Court.

Unless the Catholic Faction (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito) can convince Kennedy to come home. Praying for that.
Click to expand...
Do you think Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Kennedy will be voting a personal agenda based on their religion? Both Alito and Roberts recently told us they would decide cases based on the law and the Constitution, and not personal agendas.
 
I am actually hoping that a state will have enough courage to tell the courts that rule against them that they have no juristiction in the matter. I think the only way the judicial activism with end is to set up a Constitutional crisis.

PF
 
40.png
Aquarius:
Do you think Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Kennedy will be voting a personal agenda based on their religion? Both Alito and Roberts recently told us they would decide cases based on the law and the Constitution, and not personal agendas.
Click to expand...
True, true. But if you look at Scalia, Thomas and Alito’s track records, they appear to oppose abortion both on moral grounds (read Scalia’s dissent in Stenhart) but also constitional grounds. The three of them seem to agree that Roe has no basis in the constitution. Hopefully they will be able to pull Kennedy back into that mindset. Certainly it appears on most issues that Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts will be originalists or constructionists. If they hold true to that philosophy, it is unlikely they would uphold Roe. Kennedy is the swing vote in the Court and hopefully he will be swung back.
 
👍

Once again the people, through their representative, want to exercise their constitutional right to self governance. We will see if the tyranny of the Judiciary has been overturned. The lie that this issue is settled law is also once again exposed.
 
40.png
WanderAimlessly:
I am actually hoping that a state will have enough courage to tell the courts that rule against them that they have no juristiction in the matter. I think the only way the judicial activism with end is to set up a Constitutional crisis.
Click to expand...
Governor to Supreme Court: “I’ve heard your ruling. I refuse to enforce it. Now what?”

Probably not the best way to handle things, but it’d certainly be interesting.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Section 3. That chapter 22-17 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:
Nothing in section 2 of this Act may be construed to prohibit the sale, use, prescription, or administration of a contraceptive measure, drug or chemical, if it is administered prior to the time when a pregnancy could be determined through conventional medical testing and if the contraceptive measure is sold, used, prescribed, or administered in accordance with manufacturer instructions.
Click to expand...
The Pill, the IUD, Depo, and the Morning After Pill are exempted by this. I guess they didnt want to risk blockage of this bill based on Griswold. Good decision. Contraception is well beyond banning.

It doesnt include any provision to prevent women from traveling out of state, or from people taking an adult woman out of state. Good decision again. It could have been struck down on the grounds that it far overextends state laws over their borders.

This will get to the Supreme Court, no doubt. But as to whether they will hear it, who knows. The lower courts will rule along with Roe, and the SC can just refuse to hear it and let lower rulings stand.

I think this is their best shot at getting a hearing with the SC. However, if the SC rules against this, it does add one more case to the list of rulings supporting Roe. They are putting an awful lot on this.
 
40.png
mlchance:
Governor to Supreme Court: “I’ve heard your ruling. I refuse to enforce it. Now what?”
– Mark L. Chance.
Click to expand...
He doesnt have the ENFORCE the ruling, its just that if the police were to arrest an abortion doctor under this statue, the COURTS would dismiss the charges and let the Dr. go based on the SC ruling. period. the governor has no authority to adjuticate a case of law or criminality. once the judge says “case dismissed”, thats it. the judge can then issue a restraining order against the police from arresting the Dr. for crimes under this statute.
 
40.png
msproule:
With overwhelming bi-partisan support, the SD House of Representatives voted yesterday in favor of House Bill 1215, which if enacted into law will criminalize abortions. This would most likely force the Supreme Court’s eventual intervention and will put the lamentable Roe v. Wade decision under scrutiny.

The bill passed in voting 47-22! :clapping: There is said to be strong support in the State Senate and from what I have read the Governor is pro-life…
:gopray:
God Bless South Dakota!
Click to expand...
I knew that there was a reason that I had a good feeling everytime I visited South Dakota 👍
 
One step further for the bill:
South Dakota Senate Committee Approves Abortion Ban
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
February 17, 2006

**Pierre, SD (LifeNews.com) – **A South Dakota Senate panel has moved a ban on nearly all abortions in the state one step closer to passage. Some pro-life advocates support the legislation but others say it will only be overturned by the Supreme Court and force state taxpayers to foot pro-abortion legal bills.

The Senate committee heard testimony today on the bill and approved it on a 5-2 vote.

Full Story
Click to expand...
PF
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top