The future of choice starts Wednesday- Ayotte v Planned Parenthood

[realFedUp]

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood
Why the future of choice starts this Wednesday...

This Wednesday, November 30 the Supreme Court will hear Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood -- a case that could eliminate the requirement that abortion restrictions must include protections for women's health.

If Ayotte is decided the way the Bush administration wants, politicians -- not doctors -- will judge when patients can and cannot receive the care they need. A decision in favor of the Bush administration's standards would give a green light to states to pass laws that deny women access to abortion in medical emergencies.

Ayotte makes it clearer than ever: the balance of the Supreme Court WILL determine the future of a woman's right to choose.

If Samuel Alito is confirmed, he would tip the Court against the right to choose for decades, and Ayotte is just a sample of the kind of case he will encounter in that time.

This is why we're asking you to make a special effort this week in our National Stop Alito Petition Drive. Just a few minutes of your time could affect the future of a woman's right to choose for generations. Please, do your part by signing the Stop Alito petition today!

Samuel Alito has written, "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." We must not allow him the chance to pursue this legal philosophy as a justice on the Supreme Court when so many women's lives are at stake.

Help us tell our senators that Alito is wrong for a woman's right to choose, and wrong for our country. Sign the Stop Alito petition today.

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/takeaction/index.cfm

[David Dunham]

1. Roberts and Alito will kill Roe v. Wade -- It's a political issue now

The constitutional right to choice will soon be killed by Bush's justices. We need to get ready to fight in the state legislatures all over the country.

[realFedUp]

6. they will chip away at everything except what's called Roe v Wade

It's their election wedge issue and most of
the country does not want the government deciding
matters of privacy and rights so they won't
get rid of it outright, just chip away.

[David Dunham]

8. I think that Roberts and Alito, like Scalia and Thomas, will kill Roe

They are all vry much anti-abortion.

[Arkana]

10. Flame away, but I genuinely do not think

that Roberts will vote to overturn. What judge wants to be saddled with that? He'd be known forever as the SCOTUS judge that set women's rights back to 1920. I think the only guaranteed votes against Roe would come from Thomas, Scalia, and Alito (if confirmed).

[realFedUp]

2. More info on Ayotte v Planned Parenthood

http://www.ayottevplannedparenthood.org/

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England et al. — the first abortion-related case to come before the court in five years and the first abortion case to be argued before the Roberts Court — could unravel decades of legal protections for women's health. If the Supreme Court rules to uphold the law in question, it could give all 50 states the green light to deny women abortions in medical emergencies. It could also take away the ability to stop dangerous abortion restrictions before they cause real harm to women, instead forcing women to seek permission from a judge when they need an abortion. Under these conditions, Roe v. Wade could remain standing, but women's health and access to safe and legal abortion would be drastically compromised.

[waiting for hope]

3. Already Done!

Thanks for posting this - I meant to but didn't get around to it. I have a sneaky feeling that Roe v Wade will stay as it is for now - just can't seem to think that that Repugs will let go of a key voting issue for them - think about it, if Roe v Wade is turned (God forbid) - what will they use to gather support for their base? My hope is that Alito will get turned down. Dems are on a roll! :patriot:

[realFedUp]

4. Ayotte Case Could Dramatically Weaken Roe

http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2534

Ayotte Case Could Dramatically Weaken Roe
Run Date: 11/22/05
By Cynthia L. Cooper
WeNews correspondent

A case coming before the Supreme Court on Nov. 30 will consider whether advocates can continue to head off state anti-abortion laws on constitutional grounds. That means a legal wall of protections around abortion could crumble.

(WOMENSENEWS)--An abortion case coming before the U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 30 from the State of New Hampshire could vastly reshape and curtail women's right to choose, according to legal reproductive rights advocates.

The key question before the Supreme Court is whether anti-abortion laws passed by states may be challenged in court as unconstitutional before they take effect. Bringing these challenges, as currently happens, prevents many restrictions passed by anti-abortion legislatures from interfering with a woman's right to choose, whether bans on abortion procedures, spousal notification and others.

By changing the legal standard for when an abortion restriction can be challenged in court, anti-abortion laws could quickly entangle women across the country, without directly overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court case that held that states could not criminalize abortion in all circumstances.

"This is an incredibly important case. Depending on how the court rules, this could be a really critical moment for the pro-choice movement," said Jennifer Dalven, deputy director of the New York-based Reproductive Freedom Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents a doctor and three clinics challenging abortion restrictions passed in New Hampshire.

The case, Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, lies far below the radar of the general public and even many pro-choice activists. Those who are aware of it think of it as a case about parental notification on abortion. But its implications, said Dalven, go far beyond.

continued

[napi21]

5. I'm sure I heard cspan was going to broadcast the initial argument

on Wed. I checked their site and it doesn't seem to be there yet, but I know I heard them announce it today during won of their "coming on cspan" spots.

[realFedUp]

7. I hope DUers pay attention to this one...

taking away habeas corpus barely caused a stir
in here....

[napi21]

9. I intend to watch or listen to this on cspan.

I'm very interested in hearing both sides of the argument. I'm not an attorney, but i have testified quite a few times in court, and worked on quite a few legal cases.

I really think this case, as most are, is going to be decided on which side presents the best argument.

[realFedUp]

11. cool....nt