Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, August 05, 2014

A law that would have closed three out of Alabama's five abortion clinics is unconstitutional, ruled a federal court judge on Monday. The 2013 law, similar to legislation passed across the country, would have required abortion providers to seek admitting privileges at local hospitals. In an encyclopedic 172-page decision that followed a three-week trial, Judge Myron H. Thompson wrote that the law violated the standard set by the Supreme Court mandating that states can not place an "undue burden" on woman seeking an abortion.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

"The court is convinced that, if this requirement would not, in the face of all the evidence in the record, constitute an impermissible undue burden, then almost no regulation, short of those imposing an outright prohibition on abortion, would," wrote Thompson.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Brave judge.

#1 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2014-08-05 12:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Braver than the ones in Texas.

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-05 12:45 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

The pro life crowd in Alabama probably hasn't even noticed this. Most of them are probably headed over to border areas and are now fighting each other over who gets to take in the most children.

#3 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-05 01:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

I have to agree that unless the legislatures can establish a medical reason to require admitting privileges for these doctors, then it was wrong to require them in the first place.

What is the point of it? If an abortion procedure goes wrong and it becomes necessary to get the patient to a hospital.....call 911 and get her there. Let MDs at the hospital take it from there. WTF do admitting privileges matter? seriously...I don't know but I haven't seen any case being made by these state legislatures as to why it's important.

#4 | Posted by eberly at 2014-08-05 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I like Turtles"

#5 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2014-08-05 01:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

Braver than the ones in Texas.

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. Mark Twain"

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel of Austin had ruled that the admitting privileges provision unconstitutionally limited women's access to abortion while providing no discernible health or safety benefits for patients. www.statesman.com

#6 | Posted by et_al at 2014-08-05 01:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

I know Judge Yeakel personally. He is a reasonable man.

Unfortunately,

"But a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with Yeakel, ruling that the admitting privileges rule was constitutional despite testimony showing that it would force a number of abortion clinics to close."www.statesman.com

#7 | Posted by memyselfini at 2014-08-05 02:03 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

What is the point of it?
#4 | Posted by eberly

The point is to achieve a de facto ban on abortion. I'm surprised that's not glaringly obvious to you.

#8 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-05 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

#8

Well, I'm not surprised that it's not glaringly obvious to you that I already knew that.

#9 | Posted by eberly at 2014-08-05 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Then why'd you ask? Or is that glaringly obvious too?

#10 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-05 02:20 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

#10 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

It came off to me as somewhat rhetorical.

#11 | Posted by memyselfini at 2014-08-05 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Most of them are probably headed over to border areas and are now fighting each other over who gets to take in SHOOT the most children.

#3 | Posted by Sully

There was a typo in your post.

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-08-05 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

It came off to me as somewhat rhetorical.
#11 | Posted by memyselfini

Oh, I get it now.
For a minute I thought Eberly was doing some soul-searching on why he tends to vote for these Republican clowns.
False alarm.

#13 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-05 03:57 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

Conservatives only want small government when it comes to education, enviromental protections and helping the poor. They love big government when it comes to abortion, same sex marraige, a huge military, a huge criminal incarceration complex because big government stops people from consuming certain substances, etc. They love big government just the kind of big government that reflects their priorities.

#14 | Posted by ron81 at 2014-08-05 04:01 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 6

"In an encyclopedic 172-page decision"

Why are lawyers-judges so long-winded ?? 172 pages that boiled-down to
"the law s_cks"

#15 | Posted by SammyAZ_RI at 2014-08-05 09:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why are lawyers-judges so long-winded ?

The issues are not as simple as the simple minded pretend?

172 pages that boiled-down to
"the law s_cks"

See?

#16 | Posted by et_al at 2014-08-05 11:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort