Supreme Court may wade back into abortion debate

[BooScout]

Source: USA Today

WASHINGTON — Nearly a quarter-century after its last major ruling on abortion created a fragile balance between women's rights and government restrictions, the Supreme Court appears ready for a rematch.

And like the last time, the debate would unfold in the midst of a presidential election.

The first act could play out as early as Friday, when the justices may decide whether to hear a challenge to tough new limits placed on abortion clinics and doctors in Texas. The restrictions — forcing doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and requiring clinics to measure up to outpatient surgery centers — threaten to leave the state with just 10 clinics clustered in four population centers and along the Mexican border.

A similar law in Mississippi, which the justices also could agree to consider, threatens to close the state's lone abortion clinic. Because of that, it was struck down by the same federal appeals court that upheld the Texas restrictions.

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/13/supreme-court-abortion-clinics-restrictions/75238212/?AID=10709313&PID=3747368&SID=igxjfc6ryc0004m600dth

[still_one]

1. Any progressive who does't recognize the importance of a Democrat winning the white house in 2016

is either willfully ignorant, or self-destructive.

and it is much more than just the issue brought up in the OP. It involves labor rights, civil rights, gender rights, environmental rights, and health care.

[BooScout]

2. Not to mention the direction of the SCOTUS

For the next couple of decades.

[Hortensis]

3. Absolutely! And very likely longer than the next couple decades.

Justices retiring since 1970 averaged 25 years, and the tendency by the GOP is now to appoint younger justices so they can serve long after American voters have rejected today's extremist ideology.

[Android3.14]

4. Which is why we need someone who can rally independents and Democrats

Go Bernie!

[Hawaii Hiker]

5. And I'd also add

voting rights, 1st Amendment issues (ie; censorship)..

SCOTUS nominations alone is reason enough to RUN to the polls next November and GLADLY vote for either Clinton or Sanders!..

[NurseJackie]

6. Both ... and add selfish.

[duhneece]

9. And we have to be willing to walk, call

The Republicans mobilize to make multiple phone calls to other R's...we need to do even more. And be willing to run and serve at local levels...and work to polls on election day to get to know your neighbors who vote.

[cynzke]

10. It Proves...

How important this branch of government is. We go by faith alone that each justice will defend and protect the Constitution; and rule honestly absent prejudice or political bias. We rely solely on the OATH they swore to, that they will uphold the Constitution (that binds this country together) and not render it a worthless piece of paper.

[Demeter]

7. Haven't the Dancing Supremes done enough damage to Women?

I'd like to think they intend to fix what they broke, but the odds are against it.

[Gothmog]

8. HB 2 is a horrible law

The SCOTUS already stayed this law from going into effect and so there is good reason to hope for a grant of cert

[blackspade]

11. So are they going to legislate when and where you can get a vasectomy too?

We place no limits on anyone's health care choices unless you are a woman who doesn't want to get or doesn't want to be pregnant.
Why is that? It's about control and fighting against empowerment of women.
These troglodytes can't stand the idea of a woman making her own health decisions.
And make no mistake this is a heath issue for many women whether these assholes admit it or not.