Federal Appeals Court in New Orleans to Hear Case to Reopen Roe v. Wade

[flpoljunkie]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55368-2004Feb19.html

By LISA FALKENBERG
The Associated Press
Thursday, February 19, 2004; 5:18 PM

DALLAS - A federal appeals court has agreed to hear a request from the woman formerly known as "Jane Roe" to reconsider the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.

Norma McCorvey, who joined with anti-abortion activists nearly 10 years ago, is seeking to have the decision overturned, citing what she says is more than 30 years of evidence that abortions are psychologically harmful to women.

A federal district judge threw out her initial request in June, saying it was not made within a reasonable time. But the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to hear McCorvey's arguments March 2.

<>More than 20 Texas law school professors concerned about an unbalanced hearing filed a brief Wednesday asking to be allowed to argue the other side of the case. "It's important that the court hear from somebody representing the position that the district court took, which I think is clearly right," said David Schenck, a lawyer representing the professors. "At this point, the case is moot, and she's presenting at best a political question."

[TrogL]

1. Why am I not surprised

"Jane Roe" has been brainwashed by fundies for years.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[David__77]

3. If this isn't immediately shot down...

...this could be a BIG election issue. The GOP may have its "marriage" rallying cry, but I believe that abortion may be far more important to many people, women specifically. We can portray them as fascists.

[saltpoint]

4. The Constitution may give the fundies their --

-- right to believe what they wish, but it also gives me the right to call them ignorant and mean-spirited.

They oppose both a woman's right to choose AND progressive sex education in schools.

That's not a very persuasive moral position.

I hope the courts throw this out so fast it will make Jim Dobbins' head spin.

[lovedems]

15. Can I tell you how correct you are!

Before I became a "stay at home mom", I worked as a case manager for teen-age mothers.

My job was to help them with childcare, transportation, job training, education, whatever. Whatever it took to get them to make a better life for themselves.

The fact that the fundies want to teach abstinence only is so stinking stupid, I have witnessed it first hand. These girls had NO IDEA about the true consequences of their actions. They were not very informed with sex ed, STD's, birth control, you name it. Our agency got to the point where we started doing workshops in schools in a desperate attempt to inform these kids correctly.

There were alot of people in my office who were completely unsympathetic with these girls. I was quite different. They were struggling finacially, physically, and emotionally. I felt for them. By the time they realized their new responsibility, it was to late.

I am not advocating abortion, I am advocating education. It really does make a huge difference and a womans right to chose should not be taken away.

[saltpoint]

18. Hi, lovedems.

Wow, what a great post you have here. Thanks for putting this up for everyone.

Also I love your avatars in your signature. Just excellent.

All good wishes.

[lovedems]

23. Thank you!

:hi:

This is an issue very close to my heart. I got to witness first hand the devastating effects of not using the best tool our country has for kids....EDUCATION! I can't be cherry picked, it has to be honest and poignant. No shilly, I am going to tell you this to scare you, just an open discussion with kids. Let me tell you, they can handle it and they appreciate it. Thanks for the avatar comment too!

[Jacobin]

5. Oh shit. The Fifth Circuit used to be a great circuit

and suffered the slings and arrows of the outraged racists when it handed down progressive civil rights opinions.

It is now completely (well heavily) stacked with RW morons, one of whom Smirky would like to promote to the SCOTUS.

This is NOT good. Not good at all.

[SeattleDem]

6. psychologically harmful?

is that a standard on which to overturn a previous ruling?

Abortion isn't psychologically harmful to ALL women. It may in fact be psychologically harmful to SOME women, but that isn't a reason to ban the procedure for ALL women.

Women making this choice may be well-advised to consider the potential for later psychological harm, but to deny them the opportunity to choose what is best for them at a given point in their lives is outrageous!

I know at least 4 friends or family members who have chosen abortion and never regretted it for one minute. Maybe Norma Jean has regrets but that doesn't make her a spokesperson for all of us.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

9. Tell that to that lady in Texas suffering post partum depression that

drowned her flock of unaborted children. Now they're just as dead as if they were aborted!

[flamingyouth]

17. No kidding!

Good point. :thumbsup:

[starroute]

21. Giving up a baby for adoption is also psychologically harmful

I remember reading something on this a number of years ago. I think it was merely anecdotal evidence -- not a statistical survey. But the conclusion was that many women who give birth and then hand the baby over for adoption suffer long-term feelings of grief, loss, and guilt which are as great as or greater than those felt by women who have had abortions.

[LiberalFighter]

27. How can she have standing in the appeal?

The Supreme Court decision came after McCorvey had her baby. The baby was the third child McCorvey put up for adoption; she was a 21-year-old carnival worker at the time.

###
How did she suffer psychological harm if she didn't have the abortion??

[fob]

7. abortions are psychologically harmful to women - As opposed to birth and

adoption and/or keeping an unwanted child which is all wine and roses! In fact psychiatrists have proven that forcing women to carry to term and then giving the child up for adoption makes women SO happy, that endorphins should be labled a controlled substance and the women sent straight to jail.

There isn't a font size big enough for the WTF! necessary to respond to this correctly.

[SeattleDem]

12. so true, as a reunited adult adoptee

I can tell you how traumatic it was for my birthmother to relinquish me in the 60's. That event changed her life forever. Thankfully, reunion brought peace and much happiness to us both.

I would never have denied her decision to abort to keep her life on track. Maybe that's crazy since it's me I'm talking about not being here today, but who am I to demand the sacrifices that she made on my behalf? I had no right to do that as a fetus.

There is the potential for great psychological harm in forcing women to bear children too. Will the court consider that?

[lovedems]

16. Please see my post above. You are soooo right. n/t

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. I'm just dying to hear one more person say there's no difference between

Kerry and Bush...democrats and republicans...and on and on and on....

Fuck it. I'm gay...and I don't plan on getting married to any woman or man in the near future. It's highly unlikely I'll conceive in the meantime. I may as well look out for myself.
Advocating for liberal values has been an exercise in futility.

[Democat]

22. You don't have to wait, check the election forum

There are plenty of people over there who would like to see Bush elected to punish Kerry for getting more votes than their candidate.

[charlie]

10. A perfect storm

The court is expected to issue its Newdow ruling in June. God and Flag. Gay marriage. Abortion. War. It's going to an unholy fucked-up election season.

[LiviaOlivia]

11. 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ultra conservative aka C Pickering

Naral week of 02-09-04

Outright Attempt to Reverse Roe v. Wade Progresses

http://www.naral.org/about/newsroom/weekly_headlines.cfm

The fact that Norma McCorvey, better known as Roe, has changed her tune to become an outspoken opponent of a woman’s right to choose is old news. What’s new, however, is that 31 years after Roe v. Wade she has finally succeeded in getting her day in court - well, another day in court. The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has decided to hear oral arguments in McCorvey’s attempt to re-open Roe v. Wade. She wants to open the case in an effort to overturn the Supreme Court decision. The court date is set for early March.

This is shocking when you consider the factors surrounding this appeal. The Texas Justice Foundation, which filed the initial lawsuit on McCorvey’s behalf, is an anti-choice group whose main function is to provide legal services to the anti-choice community. The federal judge in Dallas that first heard their suit rightfully rejected it, perhaps seeing it as the political maneuver and media ploy that it is. Incidentally – the Dallas judge was appointed by George W. Bush and does not appear to be a choice supporter – simply a judge who was able to see past the political rhetoric in this case. But the plot thickens – as the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which generally hears oral arguments in less than ten percent of the cases filed, has agreed to hear arguments in this strange attempt to re-open a well-settled. With ultra-conservative judges like Charles Pickering sitting on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, this case could progress and ultimately finds its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, again.

It’s a pretty scary thought and a solid reminder of the importance of the ongoing judicial nominations battle.

[Jazzgirl]

13. Thanks LiviaOlivia. I was looking for Pickering's appointment.

I thought it was the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. When I read that headline, I knew he was gonna be the one to hear it. This man was the most hotly contested candidate *shrub tried to shove through and one of 6 (I believe) that dems fillibustered.

Jazzgirl

[Claire Beth]

14. Here we go!!

If dipwad gets in for another 4 yrs, it will for SURE be overturned. That is another reason this election is of the most VITAL of importance. We have GOT to protect our supreme court from these radical right idiot judges.

[WarNoMore]

19. When a woman,

recuperating from breast cancer surgery, hears blasted all over the news that her cancer is caused by an abortion, which is patently false...I assert that that is *damned* psychologically harmful.

[fishnfla]

20. Abortion and gay rights, to get Rove's "base" to vote

next you'll hear how its good for jobs and health care.

[LiviaOlivia]

24. kick

[dawn]

25. This scares me...

If the court takes this seriously, this election year is going to be worse than I thought.

Abortions CAN psychologically damage some women, but some women also learn to deal with what happened and make amends in their heart. And if we are going to make things illegal because they are psychologically damaging, well, that sure opens up a can of worms...

I guess we could remind the RW that it's also psychologically harmful to be maimed as a result of war. But war will never be declared illegal.

[Judi Lynn]

26. The Houston Chronicle makes some interesting points

(snip)
Opposing arguments will be made by David Schenck, a lawyer with the Dallas law firm Hughes & Luce. He was retained by 20 Texas law school professors, including several from the University of Houston School of Law.

"The Constitution assigns responsibility of deciding cases to a judge and, ultimately, to the Supreme Court," Schenck said. "It's not up to litigants to overrule them just because they disagree."

While procedures exist to present new evidence in cases decided by the high court, Schenck argued that McCorvey has no new facts to warrant reconsideration of the case.

More significant than McCorvey's personal involvement in Roe v. Wade, he said, were constitutional questions concerning privacy.

"Like it or not," he said, "that's a legal determination that's not up to the parties to remake at will."
(snip/...)

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2411686

Hope these guys really know what they're talking about. They don't sound impressed by these right-wing extremists. Hope their observations are correct, and will be proven.