The state’s “trigger law” is temporarily blocked by a Louisiana judge

On Monday, a Louisiana court temporarily outlawed three state laws that would declare almost all abortions illegal.

If the Supreme Court ever overturned Rowe v. Wade, as it did on Friday, the abortion ban was supposed to take effect. Similar legislation, referred to as the “Trigger Act,” has been passed by several states across the United States.

Shortly after an abortion clinic in the state filed a lawsuit, Orleans Parish Civil District Court Judge Robin Giarusso ordered a temporary closure, according to the ruling.

The Reproductive Rights Center, which represents abortion organizations, claims that bans on abortion are unconstitutional and violate the fair process rights of providers.

The groups claim the rules are too vague because they do not specify a start date after Roe.

On July 8, Jiaruso is scheduled to hear the case. The court will then decide to extend the stay. For now, abortion is still allowed in the state.

This is just a systematic plot used by a lone judge to shout in the air. When they refuse to examine the mound of evidence of electoral fraud in 2020, most courts will soon begin using “lack of position” defenses to avoid involvement in political conflict. Democrats are getting a taste of their own medicine.

For the first time since Rowe v. Wade’s decision in 1973, state governments are now able to control abortion. The Supreme Court handed down the verdict on Friday.

Louisiana Trigger Law prohibits abortion in all situations when there is a risk of maternal death or serious harm. There are no exceptions to the law for rape or incest.

The Reproductive Rights Center, on behalf of abortion rights advocates, said the restrictions on abortion were unconstitutional because they were “without constitutional protection to avoid arbitrary enforcement.”

First, the accused usually has the right to due process, which is not the case. There is no legal right to block a law that you do not agree with because of due process. Unless they can prove that there is arbitrary application, there is nothing. What did not happen cannot be proved. This is an unreasonable argument that the judge should have dismissed. The case is not ready yet.

Let’s get it. Going back to the state and the people is not a problem for me. But the real issue is whether state legislators are speaking on behalf of their constituents or for themselves. It would be advisable if every state held a referendum on the right to abortion. Allow cards where they can read.

Democrats have been spending honeymoon time with more left-leaning courts, the education system, the media and other institutions for the past 50+ years. They act like angry vows when a handful of decisions don’t go their way.

I thought that all states and state authorities needed the U.S. Constitution (possibly under the Federal Supremacy Clause?) To comply with and uphold both federal law and federal court rulings within their states.

Hey everyone, pay attention. The US Supreme Court has not declared abortion illegal. The jurisdiction was only returned to the state level, where it was. Ginsberg even acknowledged that the original Rowe v. Wade judgment was not supported by strong legal reasoning and predicted that it would not last over time. He was right. Abortion laws depend on individual states to make decisions. It was never a constitutionally protected privilege.

The opinions expressed by contributors and / or content partners do not necessarily reflect the views of on their own and necessarily

Dear Members,
Are you sick of seeing ads? Well then it’s time to get rid of them! is proud to offer a premium VIP membership that eliminates ads and gives you the best browsing experience.

Sign up here and join us!

Follow Rumble Wayne!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.