The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
US House Oversight and Reform Committee, 30 Sep 2021, featuring dubious reading comprehension, a RAFT of bills purporting to perfect "constitutional rights", tears, sippy cups, and Gloria Steinem, "feminist icon" of the middling sort--possibly low-income menstruating colored people--as is the custom when FIFTH WAVE politicians have exhausted a philosophy of "qualified" equity and meritocracy which has bound the nation in their exceptional ignorance in "cases of rape or incest". running time 05:01:39.
reference Jane ROE, et al., Appellants, v. Henry WADE, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
Held: While 28 U.S.C. § 1253 authorizes no direct appeal to this Court from the grant or denial of declaratory relief alone, review is not foreclosed when the case is properly before the Court on appeal from specific denial of injunctive relief and the arguments as to both injunctive and declaratory relief are necessarily identical. P. 123. Roe has standing to sue; the Does and Hallford do not. Pp. 123-129. [...] 3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term. Pp. 147-164. [...] The State may define the term "physician" to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined. P. 165. It is unnecessary to decide the injunctive relief issue, since the Texass authorities will doubtless fully recognize the Court's ruling
314 F. Supp. 1217, affirmed in part and reversed in part. [the contrite Klans man] BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, STEWART, MARSHALL, and POWELL, JJ., joined. BURGER, C.J., post, p. 410 U. S. 207, DOUGLAS, J., post, p. 209, and STEWART, J., post, p. 167, filed concurring opinions. WHITE, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which REHNQUIST, J., joined, post, p. 221. REHNQUIST, J., filed a dissenting opinion, post, p. 171.
[the contrite Klans man] BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, STEWART, MARSHALL, and POWELL, JJ., joined. BURGER, C.J., post, p. 410 U. S. 207, DOUGLAS, J., post, p. 209, and STEWART, J., post, p. 167, filed concurring opinions. WHITE, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which REHNQUIST, J., joined, post, p. 221. REHNQUIST, J., filed a dissenting opinion, post, p. 171.
archived Who is a "health provider"?
by Frank Schnittger - May 27 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 5 22 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 1 comment
by Oui - May 13 65 comments
by Carrie - Apr 30 7 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 273 comments
by Oui - May 2712 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 231 comment
by Oui - May 1365 comments
by Oui - May 910 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 522 comments
by Oui - May 449 comments
by Oui - May 312 comments
by Oui - May 29 comments
by gmoke - May 1
by Oui - Apr 30269 comments
by Carrie - Apr 307 comments
by Oui - Apr 2644 comments
by Oui - Apr 886 comments
by Oui - Mar 19143 comments