[ad_1]
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday night not to issue an injunction against the application of a controversial Texas law that prohibits abortion when there is a fetal heartbeat – usually six weeks after the onset of a pregnancy – but despite not rendering any constitutional judgment, progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, DN.Y., claim he overturned Roe v. Wade.
The question in court was not whether Texas law is constitutional, but whether it should temporarily block law enforcement while the case is pending. Nonetheless, the New York congressman said the court had struck down the legal precedent set on the constitutionality of abortion and that judicial folding was the only remedy.
SUPREME COURT VOTE 5-4 TO LEAVE TEXAS ABORTION LAW IN PLACE
“The Republicans promised to topple Roe v Wade, and they did,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted Wednesday night. “Democrats can either abolish filibuster and expand the tribunal, or do nothing as the bodies, rights and lives of millions of people are sacrificed for the rule of a far-right minority. It shouldn’t. not be a difficult decision. “
In response to the court ruling, Ocasio-Cortez reiterated a long-standing call from the left to increase the number of Supreme Court justices so President Biden can add liberal justices and withdraw the Tory majority.
The unusual law places enforcement in the hands of the public, not government officials, so the majority of the court questioned whether an injunction against the prosecuted officials would be an appropriate remedy. The court also noted that the individual who was sued swore that he did not intend to press charges under the law.
In making their decision, the majority specifically said their decision is not a judgment on whether the law itself should stand after the case is fully argued.
MSNBC ANALYST COMPARES TEXAS ABORTION LAW TO SLAVERY, SAYS THERE IS A ‘BOUNTY ON WOMEN’S HEADS’
“In reaching this conclusion, we stress that we do not purport to resolve definitively any jurisdictional or substantive claim in the Applicants’ lawsuit. In particular, this order is not based on any finding as to the constitutionality of Texas law, and does not in any way limit other appropriate procedural challenges to Texas law, including in the state courts of Texas, ”the court said.
Fox News asked Ocasio-Cortez’s office if the congressman had clarification on her tweet, but it did not immediately respond.
The MP is far from the only one to share false conclusions about the court’s decision. Ocasio-Cortez’s left-wing Congressional Representative, Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., Made similar statements about the ruling and the court process.
“Within a week, the Supreme Court forced 11 million homes to be evicted and effectively struck down Roe v. Wade in the middle of the night,” Bush tweeted. “This is what far-right extremism looks like. We need to expand the tribunal.”
Bush’s tweet was slightly different in that it only claimed that Roe v. Wade had been “effectively” abandoned instead of being overthrown. Likewise, Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern was retweeted by Ocasio-Cortez after claiming that “Roe v. Wade is, functionally, canceled.” Stern, however, later tweeted that “Roe is no longer a good law”, which is not true.
Barb McQuade, a former US lawyer appointed by Obama for the Eastern District of Michigan and current NBC legal analyst, tweeted that the court ruling was a “[b]latent disregard for 48 years of precedent under Roe, ”despite the court ruling noting that abortion providers who challenge the law have“ raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law at issue ”.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Elsewhere on Twitter, more nuanced reviews of the ruling could be found. Rick Hasen, a law professor at UC-Irvine, was very skeptical of the Tory majority’s motivation behind the denial of the injunction request, calling it a “sleight of hand,” but he didn’t. not said that they had changed the law of the land.
“No, Roe v. Wade wasn’t canceled tonight,” Hasen said. “But the ease with which Texas has claimed to demolish the court’s abortion case law tells you everything you need to know about the right to choose in this court.”
[ad_2]
Source link