Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester and Grow
http://thefogbow.com/forum/
Proudly marching backwards into the 16th century...Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 7:07 pm Alabama: Where bureaucrats give all women an equal opportunity to bleed out in an ambulance racing to the border, no matter the circumstances of conception or medical history.
We already have one of the worst - if not THE worst- fetal/maternal mortality in the US. We're worse than some "3rd world" countries.raison de arizona wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:15 pm
TizzyEnt @TizzyEnt wrote: hospitals in Alabama wont deliver babies & mortality rates are among the highest in the country.
Lawyers in the Texas attorney general’s office said Tuesday that women should sue their doctors, not the state, over a lack of access to abortion in defending the state’s strict law.
Beth Klusmann of the Texas Attorney General’s Office made that point in oral arguments before the state Supreme Court in a case challenging Texas’s abortion ban, which bars doctors from providing abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected — typically around six weeks into pregnancy — with exceptions only for cases in which the life of the mother is at risk.
“If a woman is bleeding, if she has amniotic fluid running down her legs — then the problem is not with the law,” Klusmann said. “It is with the doctors.”
Klusmann was responding to plaintiffs in the case, who had charged the legislation had plunged the state into a “health care crisis.”
The lawsuit in Zurawski v. Texas was brought by 22 women who said that state law had forced them to carry nonviable and dangerous pregnancies to term — in other words, to go through the ordeal of pregnancy with a fetus that would not survive, and that in many cases was putting them at serious risk.
The suit brought by the Center for Reproductive Freedom charges that many of the 22 women were denied care because, despite the severity of the damage that the non-viable pregnancy was doing their body, doctors told them they weren’t quite sick enough for it to be clearly life threatening.
Disgusting.A Texas woman has filed an emergency lawsuit, asking a Travis County judge to allow her to terminate her pregnancy.
This is the first time since before Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 that an adult woman has asked a court to intervene to allow her to terminate a pregnancy, and the first lawsuit of its kind since Texas banned almost all abortions in 2022.
Kate Cox, a 31-year-old Dallas woman, learned last week that her fetus was diagnosed with full trisomy 18, a chromosomal anomaly that is almost always fatal before or soon after birth. The fetus is developing with an umbilical hernia, a twisted spine, a club foot and an irregular skull and heart, according to the lawsuit.
Cox, who already has two children, both delivered by Cesarean section, also has elevated glucose and underlying health conditions. The lawsuit alleges she is at increased risk of gestational hypertension and diabetes and complications from anesthesia and cesarean section, if she were to carry the pregnancy to term.
“Ms. Cox’s physicians also explained that a C-section at full term would make subsequent pregnancies higher risk and make it less likely she would be able to carry a third child in the future,” the lawsuit says.
“I’m trying to do what is best for my baby and myself, but the state of Texas is making us both suffer,” Cox said in a press release. “I need to end my pregnancy now so that I have the best chance for my health and a future pregnancy.”
Court grants Texas woman's request for emergency abortion in historic ruling
Kate Cox asked a Texas court for an abortion to preserve her fertility.
ByNadine El-Bawab
December 7, 2023, 6:45 PM
A judge granted a Texas woman's request for an abortion for a pregnancy with a severe anomaly on Thursday.
The woman, Kate Cox, had filed a lawsuit against the state over its restrictive abortion bans, asking a judge to grant her a temporary restraining order that would allow her to get an abortion.
"The idea that Miss Cox wants desperately to be a parent, and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking, and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice," Judge Maya Guerra Gamble, a Democrat elected to the bench, said Thursday.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/hearing-under ... =105455849
She won, so Paxton threatens the hospitals.RTH10260 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 1:37 pmCourt grants Texas woman's request for emergency abortion in historic ruling
Kate Cox asked a Texas court for an abortion to preserve her fertility.
ByNadine El-Bawab
December 7, 2023, 6:45 PM
A judge granted a Texas woman's request for an abortion for a pregnancy with a severe anomaly on Thursday.
The woman, Kate Cox, had filed a lawsuit against the state over its restrictive abortion bans, asking a judge to grant her a temporary restraining order that would allow her to get an abortion.
"The idea that Miss Cox wants desperately to be a parent, and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking, and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice," Judge Maya Guerra Gamble, a Democrat elected to the bench, said Thursday.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/hearing-under ... =105455849
Ken Paxton can Musk himself.Greatgrey wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 3:18 pmShe won, so Paxton threatens the hospitals.RTH10260 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 1:37 pmCourt grants Texas woman's request for emergency abortion in historic ruling
Kate Cox asked a Texas court for an abortion to preserve her fertility.
ByNadine El-Bawab
December 7, 2023, 6:45 PM
A judge granted a Texas woman's request for an abortion for a pregnancy with a severe anomaly on Thursday.
The woman, Kate Cox, had filed a lawsuit against the state over its restrictive abortion bans, asking a judge to grant her a temporary restraining order that would allow her to get an abortion.
"The idea that Miss Cox wants desperately to be a parent, and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking, and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice," Judge Maya Guerra Gamble, a Democrat elected to the bench, said Thursday.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/hearing-under ... =105455849
Yeah, I found several falsehoods in the Paxton letter when compared to the text of the TRO, so I'm not going to take any claim of that letter at face value.chancery wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 3:34 pm Ghoulish is the word.
However, taking Paxton's letter at face value (which might, of course, be inappropriate), it suggests that the plaintiff might have committed some tactical own goals by not following the requirements of the statute, e.g., a second opinion, tracking the language of the statute, etc.
Possibly the plaintiff might have challenged the requirements as unreasonable under the circumstances, but it seems to me that in the post-Roe world you want to keep your litigation strategy as meticulous and tightly focused as possible.
Okay, I've read through the law, the complaint, and the TRO. A second opinion isn't required by statute, merely the hospital procedures (and the complaint clearly states that the doctor received approval from the hospital to perform the abortion if she got the thumbs up from the court). The TRO states the doctor's "best medical judgment" was to abort, which tracks closely with "reasonable medical judgment" - maybe slightly sloppy language here, but the complaint extensively discusses the "reasonable medical judgment" standard. Paxton pretends this isn't in the TRO. "Good faith belief" is the standard for medical exemptions according to multiple court rulings, according to the complaint. Paxton is playing word games, nothing more, and outright lying in multiple places. And the permanent injunction in two weeks can tie up any loose ends.chancery wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 3:34 pm Ghoulish is the word.
However, taking Paxton's letter at face value (which might, of course, be inappropriate), it suggests that the plaintiff might have committed some tactical own goals by not following the requirements of the statute, e.g., a second opinion, tracking the language of the statute, etc.
Possibly the plaintiff might have challenged the requirements as unreasonable under the circumstances, but it seems to me that in the post-Roe world you want to keep your litigation strategy as meticulous and tightly focused as possible.
In the petition, Paxton asked the Texas Supreme Court to rule quickly, saying that “each hour [the temporary restraining order] remains in place is an hour that Plaintiffs believe themselves free to perform and procure an elective abortion.”
https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics- ... 06113.htmlKentucky woman sues state over abortion ban so she can terminate her pregnancy
A Kentucky woman Friday filed an emergency class-action lawsuit, asking a Jefferson County judge to allow her to terminate her pregnancy. It’s the first lawsuit of its kind in Kentucky since the state banned nearly all abortions in 2022 and one of the only times nationwide since before Roe v. Wade in 1973 that an adult woman has asked a court to intervene on her behalf and allow her to get an abortion. A woman in Texas this week asked a local judge there to allow her to terminate her nonviable pregnancy. Kentucky, like Texas, has a near-total abortion ban with no exceptions for rape, incest or lethal fetal conditions that result in a nonviable pregnancy.
The Kentucky woman, who’s using the pseudonym Jane Doe, is eight weeks pregnant and is seeking an abortion in the Bluegrass State, “but cannot legally do so because of the challenged abortion bans,” according to the 52-page lawsuit filed Friday by the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky. Filed in Jefferson County Circuit Court, the class-action lawsuit, which includes Planned Parenthood as a plaintiff, asks a judge to issue a temporary restraining order, blocking enforcement of Kentucky’s trigger law and six-week abortion ban. She and other pregnant women who wish to no longer be pregnant are “suffering medical, constitutional and irreparable harm because they are denied the ability to obtain an abortion.” “Jane Doe brings this action on behalf of herself and a class of similarly situated people who are now or later become pregnant and seek an abortion in Kentucky but cannot obtain one in the Commonwealth because of the challenged abortion bans,” the lawsuit reads.
Biden-Harris HQ @BidenHQ wrote: Reporter: Republicans are threatening to go after any doctor who might try to perform an abortion for Kate Cox, who is facing risks to her life, saying they could risk losing their license and up to life in prison. Her own husband could be at risk of being charged