Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Supreme Court rejects challenge to abortion ruling

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:27 PM
Original message
Supreme Court rejects challenge to abortion ruling
February 22, 2005

SUPREME COURT The U-S Supreme Court has turned down a chance to review its 1973 decision legalizing abortion.

The court rejected without comment a new appeal brought by the woman originally at the center of the historic case. In doing so, the justices ducked a highly charged political debate -- for now.

Norma McCorvey's protest of a Texas abortion ban led to the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling.

more...

http://www.team4news.com/Global/story.asp?S=2982366
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. This must have the fundies P.O.d
This and the Gannon/Guckert scandal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. Great news, thanks for posting it. woohooo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. when I first saw this story, I thought I was seeing things ...goes smackup
against the RNC's morals and values campaign ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rockedthevoteinMA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. Nice!
What the hell is up with this woman? Only legalize abortion for her? Does she think the whole damn country revolves around her?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
5. Pretty good news. I bet Jim Dobson kicked his dog over this.
It's bought a little time. I dont think the battle's over just yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sgent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. This isn't even a real case
This was one of the worst possible cases the extremists could have brought. It tugged freeper heartstrings because it involved the original plantiff in Roe; however, the case itself was legally crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yes -- I knew they had the "original" celebrity and all...
Still, as slapdash as it was, I think it sent a message through fundie ranks that they are going to have a higher hurdle to hop.

And I hope they bang their knees up somethin' awful doin' it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. ...then there is old sick Rehnquist ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-05 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. I'm surprised the fundies have been so quiet over this ...
Edited on Wed Feb-23-05 07:55 AM by NVMojo
WTF??? Didn't they try to beat up Kerry with the "abortion" issue in the campaign???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fortyfeetunder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-05 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
10. Down for the count, just for now.
Once Bush nominates his SCOTUS candidates in later in his administration, this case will be back, guaranteed. We are on a limited reprieve. I do not see this as a victory by any means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-05 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I think the same ...it ain't over ...that's why they are being so quiet ..
I don't think I could stomach the fundies nominating this woman for some kind of sainthood in a campaign to kill Rove v Wade ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fortyfeetunder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-05 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. New approach for fundies.
I venture the American Taliban is looking for another strategy whilst Bush/Rove brainstorm potential SCOTUS candidates who are anti Roe V Wade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VirginiaDem Donating Member (574 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-05 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
13. There was no reason to believe the court would overturn
this ruling. They're divided on this issue but the divide is clearly marked and has been consistently maintained with this court makeup.
Were that same case to come up against a court with one less Stevens or Ginsberg and one more Scalia or Thomas and all bets are off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DebinTx Donating Member (389 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-05 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
14. How many times now has Corvey gone before the SC?
I seem to recall just a year or two ago, she tried to get them to look at it then and they wouldn't. IMO, that's good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-05 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
15. Good! (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC