‘Terrible’ Texas abortion law unites ‘Vigilantes’ rights: DOJ Attorney

An attorney for the Justice Department on Friday condemned Texas’ new abortion law, which is “terrible” and “destructive,” for empowering “awakening donors” to undermine women’s constitutional rights.

Such an application “avoids” judicial review, which is “an open threat to the rule of law,” argued attorney Brian Netter at the first federal court hearing on the law in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. He accused the state of carrying out an “unprecedented attack on the dominance of the federal government.”

The three-month virtual hearing was held to consider a request to block the law department, which has been in effect for a month and is the most limited in the country.

The law prohibits abortion six weeks later, before most women know they are pregnant. The force is applied through civic caution, which, if successfully sued by someone who “provides support and persuasion” for abortion, could win up to ড 10,000 in civilian damages – from a doctor to a driver.

District Judge Robert Pitman was found to agree with Netter that the precautionary measure was a strategy designed to protect the Mexican Texas government from a legal challenge. He questioned why Texas went “so far” that he identified it as an unusual law aimed at preventing judicial review. According to The Wall Street Journal, Pitman said, “The whole law was designed to do just that.”

Attorney Will Thompson, representing Texas, claims there is nothing unprecedented about giving a state’s private state the power to enforce state law in state courts.

He also emphasized the tactic by telling the judge that the order could not be overturned because there was no one (e.g. Texas Govt. Greg Abbott) who could be barred by the court from enforcing the law – because no one in government is responsible for enforcing the law.

The journal noted that the judge did not fully believe and he asked a number of questions about a possible ban. Pitman did not say when he would issue a verdict.

Netar argued that the vigilantes trying to enforce the law were “state actors” at the behest of the state government and the state is still being held accountable.

He warned that if the vigilantes were given the power to enforce other questionable laws, in the future a citizen could be assumed to sue someone for criticizing a president for $ 1 million – even though it would violate First Amendment rights.

The U.S. Supreme Court last month voted in favor of not immediately blocking the controversial anti-abortion law. Countless women have already traveled long distances outside the state for abortions.

The Justice Department filed its lawsuit Sept. 9, arguing that the blatant violation of the Texas Constitution led to a ban on abortion.

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button