• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

Judge Blocks Enforcement of Texas Abortion Law

Judge temporarily blocks enforcement of law in Texas:

A US judge has temporarily blocked a controversial new law in Texas that effectively bans women from having an abortion in the state.

District Judge Robert Pitman granted a request by the Biden administration to prevent any enforcement of the law while its legality is being challenged.
The law was put forward and approved by Republican politicians in Texas.

The White House praised the ruling as an important step to restoring women's constitutional rights.
 
Every legal challenge to a law can be based upon different technicalities. SCOTUS has already knocked down one legal challenge to this law once already.
I am not familiar with the two challenges if they are presenting two distinct reasons to challenge the law. Itโ€™s possible but it could just be lawfare to keep the issue alive.

Take the case of the Baker in Colorado. Heโ€™s been sued by the state on civil rights violations three times.
People will come in and request a cake for a same sex marriage or coming out party. He does not refuse to make them the cake. But on religious grounds he cannot decorate the cake saying what they which him to put on it.
Heโ€™s been all the way to SCOTUS twice already and they have overturned the lower courts conviction both times.
The AG of Colorado just hit him again.
Itโ€™s a very hard thing to defend. SCOTUS has upheld his right to withhold his creative talent when it goes against his religious convictions. And Colorado just turns around and hits him with the same charge again.
Theyโ€™re purposely just trying to ruin him now financially.
Itโ€™s so bad justice Thomas actually intimidated this behavior of constantly trying to re-litigate the same issue over and over might need some form of censure.
Same as the mandates, there has been no change in any laws and state and federal law specifically states on religious or medical exemptions the only grounds which a employer may reject them are if the request puts an undo financial burden on the employer.
Thatโ€™s it
But because we selectively recognize and uphold laws in different cases the laws mean nothing.
Itโ€™s just power not justice.
 
religious or medical exemptions
I'll have to find it I forgot to post it. But a hospital chain in Colorado told its religious exempt people for vaccine have to sign a legal binding contract to also not use any other medication like Tylenol to Allergy medications because if your religion says no to modern medicine than that applies to everything else too. Can't be hypocritical and agree with it.
 
I'll have to find it I forgot to post it. But a hospital chain in Colorado told its religious exempt people for vaccine have to sign a legal binding contract to also not use any other medication like Tylenol to Allergy medications.
I've read that article. It's because the objections they use over the vaccine are the same things done for Tylenol. So the hospital is "testing their sincerity".
 
But the deal is in the EEOC guidelines.
It does not matter if the exemption request even makes sense to the employer, or if there is no established religious doctrine to uphold their belief.
Even if the employee is the only person who holds that belief.
They canโ€™t question the rational of their belief.
No letter from spiritual leader may be required. And certainly no documents forced to be signed stipulating what other behaviors or products you will not use.
It is only if providing the exemption is financially prohibitive to the employer.

That is what bothers me about things like this. The laws are clear theyโ€™ve been established for years. But politicians and employerโ€™s choose to ignore them to do whatโ€™s expedient or politically popular.
 
Top