Supreme Court blocks parts of Texas abortion law



Shut=-down clinics are allowed to reopen immediately.


So let’s see.

A Supreme Court with 5 Republican appointed judges voted 6-3 in favor of abortion rights.

Told you so on the “Can Catholics vote Democrat?” thread.

It is gullible and silly to vote Republican on the federal level just in the hope that they will do something on the national level about ‘social conservative’ issues (remember, the current Supreme Court is majority Republican appointed). And no Catholic is morally bound by pure lip service to issues.

See some of my posts there:

And here some quotes from a conservative party (Constitution Party of Virginia) rejecting the Republican Party precisely on grounds of lip service:

Voting for the GOP on the state level may be a different matter.


This is very disappointing! I still cannot understand how people can be pro woman while advocating for unregulated abortion that allows Gosnell style clinics.


This is the same court that decided not to hear same sex marriage cases where federal courts ignored the votes of a majority who made clear what was always so, that marriage is between men and women. This same court allowed my state to suddenly become a same sex marriage state despite the people just two years ago overwhelmingly voting to amend our constitution to make clear marriage is marriage.

No surprise. As the late great Joe Sobran noted in the early part of this century the court, which was even more ‘Republican’ had the opportunity to roll back abortion as a right. They chose not to revealing the strategy of electing Republicans to change the court is as useless as electing Republicans to change anything else.

As Chesterton noted: ‘The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.’


Judge Robert Bork was nominated to the Supreme Court and Democrats, Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy blocked it, after that nominee eventually came Anthony Kennedy who reaffirmed Roe V. Wade. Close but no cigar. The Democrats clearly blocked a pro-life nominee.

Oh no, they happily promoted this vicious attack because a 5th vote against Roe could not get onto the Supreme Court. The ends justify the means. Pay any price, to twist his brother John’s words. Remember the reporter who wrote about his video tape rentals?
Bork was rejected 58-42 by the Senate. And so President Reagan nominated Anthony Kennedy instead.* Anthony Kennedy’s priest “vouched” for him and his pro-life views.** And yet, just five years later, in 1992, Kennedy was the fifth vote to re-affirm Roe in the Casey decision.

How Joe Biden And Ted Kennedy Took Down Robert Bork

Budget Impasse, Military Soldiers denied pay checks unless America’s biggest abortion provider Planned Parenthood is funded.

Democrats only allow Budget if Planned Parenthood is funded.

**Republicans want more cuts as part of any deal, bringing the total to perhaps $40 billion, as well as non-spending items that would curtail the reach of the Environmental Protection Agency and cut off federal funding for Planned Parenthood. **


No, it’s a distortion of history, Democrats blocked the nomination to the Supreme Court of Robert Bork, pro-lifer, history may well be different.

Ted Kennedy was absolutely hardened in opposition to Bork while Ted Kennedy at the same time, ferociously defended abortion as he would later defend partial-birth abortion.


It is not a distortion of history. The composition of the court was seven of nine Republican nominations in the early part of this century. That is a fact. It is also a fact the current court is a Republican majority.

It is true that Democrats have hindered nominations at times. To me it seems the Republican party is the party of excuses. They always have a reason for their failures. They never accomplish anything. The Democrats are always accomplishing what they want. The Republicans are just not up to the task. They constantly fail. Why would a person continue to support an organization that always fails? I would think believers in the value of the free market would find some other organization to support.

Another point to make is the Republicans controlled the Presidency, both houses of Congress, and the Court during the last decade. Finally they were completely in charge. And what changed? What part of big government got rolled back? Nothing. Yes, there are all manner of excuses. But the Democrats always seem to get their way without controlling all branches. I know the Democrat party isn’t any smarter than Republicans. So what is the problem with Republicans that they can not accomplish anything?


Did you vote pro-life every time? Did the OP ever vote for pro-abortion candidates? I know I’ve tried to vote pro-life every time.

The problem is that critics that don’t have skin in the game expect Republicans to be supermen, critics who often have probably supported pro-abortion candidates.

Face it, Biden, Kennedy and the Democrats blocked the fifth vote against Roe v. Wade, that is history, now you are ignoring history.

Face it, Democrats have vetoed budgets that did not fund planned parenthood.

I think indeed, excuses are made to be criticizing Republicans when the political climate is indeed difficult to navigate.

Governor Scot Walker, abortion clinics closed in Wisconsin, yes, the excuse can be made the state did it but he may not get reelected because of the big special interest groups Democrats can muster such as Unions and the Abortion Lobby, Planned Parenthood, funded $500 million tax payer dollars a year and make endorsements of political candidates.

I don’t think critics take into account that from day to day, there is a battle in the trenches.

And just as we see with Same-Sex Marriage, the SCOTUS wants to be careful of dictating the law of the land after Roe V. Wade.

But critics want the Republicans to wave a magic wand to justify their criticism.


If Bork had been confirmed Roe V Wade would have been overturned when Casey vs Planned parenthood was issued in the early 90S


To my knowledge I have never voted for a pro abortion candidate unless you count the many Republicans who have at one time been pro abortion or who vote to fund Planned Parenthood in budgets they pass.

What do you mean by skin in the game?

I don’t expect Republicans to be supermen, I expect them to every once in a while actually accomplish something they claim to be trying to achieve. I was all for getting rid of the Department of Education. Bush and his Republican Congress increased the scope of the federal government’s involvement with No Child Left Behind.

Bush was the final straw for me with Republicans. They always had excuses that they didn’t control this or that branch of the government. Well, they finally had it all. And what did they do? Nothing. But they do manage to come up with new excuses as to why they failed even when they had all branches of government.

Roe v. Wade was decided by a Republican court. The whole irony is that it was a Republican court that gave us the decision the Republicans promised to roll back.

Exactly, Democrats always get what they want. Why can’t Republicans employ the same tactics?

The court is dictating same sex marriage by not hearing those cases. Meanwhile it is dictating abortion law by this order. I do agree they may well likely want to not officially vote for same sex marriage by hearing the case. They let the lower courts do the dirty work and simply allow it to stand. Politics is the art of not being responsible. And as far as that goes the Republicans are excellent politicians. They are never responsible for not achieving what they claim to support.


Precisely, and just like the Republican party is the party of excuses, Catholic Republicans here need the abortion issue as a convenient excuse to keep voting for the Republican party, see my post:


So you are saying you have NEVER voted for a pro-abortion Democratic candidate?


The Republicans have controlled both houses of congress and the Presidency for exactly 4 years in the last 70. During those 4 years they had only a narrow majority in the Senate.


And the reason for that of course is their cynical power game, see my post:

But Catholic Republicans are just too gullible to see through that.


So, are you also calling Republicans GREAT politicians in low abortion states, anti-same-sex marriage states?

Texas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Wisconsin?? North and South Dakota? Good.

Bush made sure overseas abortions were not funded per the Mexico City Policy.

**On the 20th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision and just two days into his presidency, Bill Clinton declared open season on the unborn by signing five **memorandums reversing Reagan-Bush policies intended to reduce the number of abortions.

Lifting of the so-called “gag rule” on abortion counseling at federally funded clinics got the most attention but also lifted were restrictions on federal financing of research using aborted fetuses and restrictions on aid to international family planning programs that are involved in abortion or abortion-related activities. Restrictions on abortions in military hospitals were also eased, and Clinton called for a review of the current ban on importation of RU-486, the French abortion inducing drug.

Republicans are not perfect however at the same time,


  1. Are not funding to $500 million dollars a year, Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortionist.
  2. Do not support partial birth abortion.
  3. Red States have generally much lower rates of abortion.

Democrats generally,

  1. Support abortion at every chance they can. Even have very pro-abortion personnel on their legislative staffs, former planned parenthood directors.


Texas, a largely Republican state has passed this legislation. Why are you not being laudatory towards their efforts instead of focusing on the Supreme Court of the US that is suppose to be unbiased and non-partisan?

Yes, the Supreme Court made the wrong decisions. They are not elected to office.


Bush Backs (anti) Abortion Measure

President Bush is urging the Senate to take up a bill passed by the House this week that makes it a federal crime – complete with possible fines and jail sentences – for doctors or other adults to help patients under 18 evade parental-notification requirements by crossing state lines for an abortion.


And if you actually would have read my post that I linked to you would have noticed that I say that voting Republican at the state level may make sense. But on the national level Republicans will never do anything, for the reasons stated.


It’s amazing that the OP seems to find fault with Republican Catholics but read the story that was cited in the original post:

The Center for Reproductive Rights had sued Texas this past spring, on behalf of a coalition of abortion clinics. In August, a federal judge ruled that the “ambulatory surgical centers” requirement was unconstitutional and imposed an injunction. Thursday’s appeals court ruling lifted that injunction and allowed the measure to go into effect immediately.

So a largely Republican state passes this measure but are they being applauded?

No, the unelected Supreme Court are the ones who are used as an excuse to criticize Republicans.

This does not seem logical.

4 out of 70 years, Republican control of House and Senate so this means that it was probably difficult to pass more pro-life politicians. We know this about Bork, perhaps this would have applied to Gonzales who was nominated to the Supreme Court as well.

Critics seem to think it’s a cakewalk to get these things passed.


And I did actually read your post:

Note, you use this to criticize Republican Catholics, well then you are admitting you are being unfair when the Dakotas, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. have a very good track record but instead you use this to criticize Republicans based on a non-elected body as the Supreme Court and nominees that probably usually had to go through a Nomination Process in a House and Senate that was only controlled by the Republicans for 4 years in the last 70 years.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit