Federal Judge Delays North Dakota Abo...

Federal Judge Delays North Dakota Abortion Law

There are 6 comments on the KSTP story from Jul 22, 2013, titled Federal Judge Delays North Dakota Abortion Law. In it, KSTP reports that:

A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked a new North Dakota law that bans abortion when a fatal heartbeat is detected - as early as six weeks into pregnancy, calling the law "clearly invalid and unconstitutional."

Join the discussion below, or Read more at KSTP.

Lance Winslow

San Jose, CA

#1 Jul 22, 2013
Wisconsin, Kansas, New Mexico, Arizona, North Dakota...Texas. Durn that pesky Constitution gettin' in the way of their agendas!
Sheik Yerbouti

Doylestown, PA

#2 Jul 22, 2013
Just another case of fundietards and vatican cult members trying to force their medieval beliefs on normal educated people! Too bad the Constitutions says otherwise losers!
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#4 Jul 23, 2013
Maddow had a wonderful segment on last night where she went down the list of states where right wingers had imposed unConstitutional anti-choice laws and where judges subsequently struck them down.

It's part of the Republican strategy of governance these days not just to do nothing...that would be too easy...but to actually WASTE huge amounts of time and money in trying to do things they know can't be done, like overturning Roe v. Wade or Obamacare.

The party of no...no brains, that is.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#5 Jul 23, 2013
Eighthman wrote:
It should read a FETAL heartbeat. Not Fatal.
Who's the democrat morons that TRIES to write this propaganda????
Are they hired out of India or What?
Or are they still in the 5th grade?
Hilarious...you probably don't see why though, do you?:)
Ravianna

Lincoln City, OR

#6 Jul 23, 2013
I've never understood how something that isn't in the Constitution and something that the people who wrote the Constitution would be against could be unconstitutional.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#7 Jul 23, 2013
Ravianna wrote:
I've never understood how something that isn't in the Constitution and something that the people who wrote the Constitution would be against could be unconstitutional.
You've never understood how somehting that isn't in the Constitution could be unConstitutional? Seriously? Do you think that every single act of human beings, or every possible event or action is covered by that document?

The Roe v. Wade decision was based on a right of privacy that I'm sure the founders would've understood perfectly.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Abortion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News S.C. Gov. Haley signs bill outlawing most abort... 1 hr cpeter1313 150
News Skagit County judge: Public hospitals must prov... 10 hr GEF 1
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 10 hr cpeter1313 311,324
Miss Jenny Abortion Procedure (Apr '14) Fri kemi 58
News Meet the retired nurse who pays women not to ha... Fri cpeter1313 1
News Abortion rights advocates: Illuminate meant to ... (Aug '13) Jun 21 xoxo80 49
News Ohio ACLU concerned over buffer zone around abo... Jun 16 cpeter1313 1
More from around the web