Tag: abortion
Supreme Court

During State Of The Union, Biden Put Supreme Court On Blast Over Abortion

President Joe Biden’s fiery State of the Union address on Thursday was made even stronger with some near-seamless ad-libs. None were more unexpected or more effective than when he directly took on the Supreme Court justices over their 2022 decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion.

Biden’s prepared remarks included a reference to the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, quoting Justice Samuel Alito’s excuse that the matter of abortion access should be handled at the ballot box in the states: “Women are not without electoral or political power.” Biden extemporaneously turned that passage into a direct attack on the high court.

“In its decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court majority wrote the following—and with all due respect, justices—‘women are not without electoral or political power,’” Biden said, directly addressing the six judges attending. “You’re about to realize just how much you were right about that.”

“Clearly, those bragging about overturning Roe v. Wade have no clue about the power of women, but they found out when reproductive freedom was on the ballot, we won in 2022 and we will win again in 2024,” Biden continued. “If you, the American people, send me a Congress that supports the right to choose, I promise you I will restore Roe v. Wade as the law of the land again.”

That’s an “astonishing” moment in a state of the union, said Lawrence O’Donnell, the MSNBC commentator and former Senate aide. “There was that moment that I think we all remember of the way he attacked—I guess, is the word for it—the Supreme Court to their faces, where the camera then goes to this shot of the six SCOTUS justices, three of whom he was very specifically attacking,” he said.

Three, that is, because Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, the author of the horribly momentous Dobbs decision, didn’t bother to show. “That’s never been done before, to the extent that a president has a disagreement with the Supreme Court expressed in the State of the Union address,” O’Donnell continued. “That was just astonishing.”

It’s not just astonishing. It’s a critical admonishment to the Supreme Court, which still has some democracy-defining decisions to make this term, not the least of which is whether an insurrectionist ex-president is above the law.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Jesse Watters

Fox Ignored Texas Woman's Legal Ordeal Over Emergency Abortion (VIDEO)

Fox News has barely covered the story of Kate Cox, a Texas woman who sought to terminate her pregnancy due to the fetus’s fatal diagnosis but had her court-ordered emergency abortion halted after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton petitioned the Texas Supreme Court. Instead, one Fox show opted to cover a supposed “attack” on “tradwives,” with host Jesse Watters dedicating a segment of his coveted 8 p.m. slot to the topic.

The Texas Supreme Court overturned a ruling granting Cox an exception to the state’s abortion ban

On December 5, Cox filed a lawsuit in Texas for an emergency court-ordered abortion “to protect her health, life, and future fertility.” Cox, who was 20 weeks pregnant at the time the suit was filed, sought the abortion after her fetus was diagnosed with trisomy 18 and “had no chance of survival.” In addition, the lawsuit detailed how Cox had visited three different emergency rooms in the past month with “severe cramping and unidentifiable fluid leaks” and was “at high risk for many serious medical conditions that pose risks to her future fertility and can become suddenly and unexpectedly life-threatening” if she did not undergo an abortion. The suit also included a recommendation from Cox’s OB-GYN, who stated they have a “good faith” belief that Cox should be exempted from the ban.



Texas’ current abortion ban restricts all abortions after six weeks, a period during which pregnancy would mostly not even be able to be detected, effectively banning all abortions. The ban makes narrow exceptions for “medical emergency” cases where the pregnancy “places the woman in danger of death or a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless an abortion is performed.



"The lawsuit articulates that Texas’ abortion law is inconsistent, causing confusion over which pregnancies qualify for an exception. The December 7 district court ruling allowed Cox to legally terminate her pregnancy. Paxton responded to the ruling by writing that Cox had failed to demonstrate she has a “life-threatening” medical condition related to the pregnancy that puts her “at risk of death” or major bodily harm, warning doctors they could be liable for civil and criminal penalties for providing Cox an abortion, and petitioning for intervention from the Texas Supreme Court. The following day, the court temporarily blocked Cox from receiving an abortion and, on December 11, reversed the district court’s ruling. In the opinion, the court argued that “some difficulties in pregnancy … even serious ones, do not pose the heightened risks to the mother the exception encompasses.” By the time of the ruling, Cox had already left Texas to have the abortion out of state.

Fox News barely covered Cox’s story

Fox News practically buried Cox’s story, despite wide reporting from mainstream media. Fox host Pete Hegseth briefly mentioned it on Fox & Friends Weekend during a “Headlines” segment listing major national news stories; chief political anchor Bret Baier took the same approach, devoting only about 30 seconds of airtime to the story during the prime-time “hard news” show Special Report; and a panel guest on weekend show Fox News Live brought it up during a discussion about the 2024 election.
Sean Hannity gave the most coverage to the story — but not during his prime-time Fox News show. Hannity discussed Cox’s legal fight on his radio show, arguing that her case is “definitely the exception” to Texas’ draconian abortion ban.
“This is certainly an outlier. This is not your average case,” the Fox host said.
However, Hannity was primarily concerned with how stories like Cox’s (and hardline anti-abortion stances in general) affect Republicans’ electability. Hannity also brought up the late-term abortion red herring, complaining that Democrats “never want to answer” the question of whether third-trimester abortions should be banned outright.

Fox News gave airtime to a supposed “attack” on tradwives while the real attack on Cox played out

Instead of covering Texas’ attempt at forced birth, Fox News’ Jesse Watters devoted an entire segment of his 8 p.m. broadcast to the supposed feminist assault on “tradwives”-- women who subscribe to “traditional” gender roles within marriage, often invoking the aesthetic of the 1950s housewife and romanticizing submissiveness to men. Tradwife content on social media — and the broader “trad” movement itself — has been linked to right-wing and white-supremacist ideology.

In the segment, Watters blamed the media and unhappy feminists for criticizing tradwives before interviewing Estee Williams, a popular tradwife TikToker. Williams offered a disclaimer regarding women who choose to have a career, but she also agreed with Watters’ framing, arguing: “The traditional housewife is kind of under attack right now because of feminism and definitely the 1950s housewife narrative."

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Ken Paxton

Paxton Threatens Texas Hospitals After Judge Approves Emergency Abortion

Only hours after a judge issued a ruling allowing a Texas woman facing a nonviable, life-threatening pregnancy to seek an abortion, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stepped in to threaten hospitals and doctors with both civil and criminal penalties if they comply with the judge’s ruling.

Kate Cox is a 31-year-old mother of two who was initially excited to discover she was pregnant with her third child. Several weeks into her pregnancy, Cox’s doctors informed her that the fetus had full trisomy 18, a chromosomal condition linked to abnormalities in many parts of the body. Not only does this create a high risk of either stillbirth or miscarriage, but continuing the pregnancy places Cox at high risk of a uterine rupture. This is a serious threat to her health and would imperil her ability to carry another child in the future.

Under Texas’ draconian abortion ban, even someone facing such extreme circumstances as Cox has few options. However, she went to court to seek relief, and as The Texas Tribune reports, Travis County District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble handed down a temporary restraining order that would allow Cox to obtain an abortion. However, Paxton wrote to three Houston-area hospitals within hours, threatening any facility or doctor who provides Cox with medical relief.

Under the current Texas abortion ban, abortions are permissible after six weeks of gestation only if the life of the mother is threatened. In Cox’s case, there is a possibility she could die as a result of continuing the pregnancy. However, the greater threat is to her long-term health.

Even if there are no further complications, the child will either be stillborn or suffer extensive abnormalities leading to rapid death. There is also a high likelihood of a miscarriage. Because Cox's previous two children were delivered via cesarean, a miscarriage at this point in her pregnancy creates a threat of uterine rupture, which would harm her future fertility.

In her ruling, Gamble wrote, “The Court finds that Ms. Cox’s life, health, and fertility are currently at serious risk. The longer Ms. Cox stays pregnant, the greater the risks to her life.”

In Paxton’s letter to three Houston-area hospitals, he calls Gamble an “activist” judge and claims she is unqualified to determine whether Cox faces a life-threatening situation. Paxton tells the hospitals that the temporary restraining order issued by Gamble “will not insulate you, or anyone else, from civil and criminal liability for violating Texas’ abortion laws, including first degree felony prosecutions.”

Additional threats are aimed specifically at Dr. Damla Karsan, who has been identified as the doctor offering to perform the abortion procedure. “We remind you that the [temporary restraining order] will expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws expires,” Paxton writes.

In September, despite clear evidence of his guilt, Paxon was acquitted in an impeachment trial before the Texas Senate. He still faces a federal investigation into the corruption charges at the heart of that impeachment.

According to the Texas Tribune, Cox burst into tears as Judge Gamble handed down her decision on Thursday. Cox issued a statement, saying, “It is not a matter of if I will have to say goodbye to my baby, but when. I’m trying to do what is best for my baby and myself, but the state of Texas is making us both suffer.”

Paxton is doing everything in his power to make sure that suffering continues.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Vote

Ohio Republicans Scheming To Overturn Abortion Rights Referendum

Ohio voted 56.6 to 43.4 percent to put the right to abortion in its state constitution. The very next day, Republicans were vowing to overturn that election. Overturning elections is a growing Republican Party trend, but it’s possible that even Donald Trump would hesitate to try it with a 13 percentage point margin of victory where the top election official was a Republican.

Ohio Republicans are in the “throw things at the wall and see what sticks” phase of trying to undo what their state’s voters did, as a press release from the Ohio House of Representatives Republican newsroom clearly shows.

There’s the “ignore the margin, the election was stolen anyway” argument, which state Rep. Jennifer Gross made. “Foreign billionaires don't get to make Ohio laws,” she said, adding, “This is foreign election interference, and it will not stand.” She’s talking about money from the George Soros-backed Open Society Policy Center. Soros was naturalized as a U.S. citizen in 1961, the expenditures were made according to U.S. law, and if a few million dollars could reliably swing elections toward progressive issues or candidates in Ohio, it’s safe to say the past few elections would have gone very differently. Ohio voters made this Ohio law. They’re adults who made up their own minds.

Then there are some Republicans gearing up to pretend that this amendment doesn’t mean what it says and that it needs the legislature to step in and say what it really means. “Issue 1 doesn't repeal a single Ohio law, in fact, it doesn't even mention one,” according to state Rep. Bill Dean. And that’s the opening he hopes to exploit, or, as he put it, “The amendment’s language is dangerously vague and unconstrained, and can be weaponized to attack parental rights or defend rapists, pedophiles, and human traffickers.”

While there are significant issues left to litigate, with the courts needing to decide which current abortion restrictions are allowed following the Issue 1 vote and which ones to strike down, state House Republicans are clearly very nervous about how that will go in the courts. According to their press release:

To prevent mischief by pro-abortion courts with Issue 1, Ohio legislators will consider removing jurisdiction from the judiciary over this ambiguous ballot initiative. The Ohio legislature alone will consider what, if any, modifications to make to existing laws based on public hearings and input from legal experts on both sides.

How’s that for an announcement of a planned power grab? They lost big in August on the vote attempting to make it more difficult to pass abortion rights. They lost big in November. Now, they’re looking ahead to losing in the courts—so they’re laying the groundwork to steal this election by stealing power from the courts.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.