Supreme court only finds laws 'unduly burdensome' when they relate to abortion When evaluating laws, courts rarely find them too burdensome on Americans. Take laws (or regulations) mandating coal power plants be shut down. Or laws requiring every one to have health insurance. Or laws requiring businesses to provide health insurance, or comply with ridiculous EPA regulations regarding ponds in backyards or protecting snails on lawns. None of these are considered too burdensome on Americans. Unless they relate to abortion. The Supreme Court blocked a Louisiana law that its opponents say would leave the state with only one abortion clinic. The Louisiana law, enacted in 2014, requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. A trial judge blocked the law, saying that such doctors were often unable to obtain admitting privileges for reasons unrelated to their competence and that the law created an undue burden on a woman's constitutional right to abortion. But laws requiring insurers to cover all kinds of unnecessary procedures, which drive up our insurance rates, are not considered undue burdens. A frog sitting on a 1000 acre property that's shutting down production of a factory is not considered an undue burden. But abortion (which isn't even explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, by the way) gets this special treatment. Opinion: I think some double standards are being applied here.
I'm sure you know so much more about it than those on the Supreme Court....who the heck are those people anyway....just some law school drop outs who don't know as much as you do …
Lets remember that most superior courts have more than one judge that sit in. One judge's opinion is not paramount. Judges not only have to be proficient in the law...they must mast all the different disciplines of the law. A judge must also have a high understanding of not just the law but Business, Government, Science, Technology, Medicine and Finance.
And would you keep cases like Baby K alive indefinitely? What would that do to your insurance premiums?
they should have 'feral colonies' for unwanted parasites, parents could drop them off and let the do-goodies come by twice a day to feed 'em and fluff up their bedding... it'd make it easier on everybody...
This law seems clearly oriented to denying abortion access through procedural hurdles, and absolutely nothing else.
You forgot one very important qualification that every SC appointee must have. They must have a proven track record of legislating on the side of the Establishment (be it Red or Blue) - and be orientated politically towards what ever gibberish of the day Red or Blue is promoting. Every sitting member of the SC should be removed for dereliction of duty - failure to interpret law and the constitution on the basis of the founding principles.
