Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Giustizia, Stati Uniti

Texas. Corte di Appello federale approva la nuova legge sull’aborto.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.


2021-08-19__ Texas Supreme Court 001

La 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ha sentenziato la legalità della legge SB8 del Senato del Texas in materia di aborto, rovesciando la sentenza emessa da un giudice distrettuale.

* * * * * * *

«We must decide whether the district court erred in permanently enjoining Texas’s Senate Bill 8 (SB8), which prohibits a particular type of dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion method. SB8 refers to the prohibited method as “live dismemberment” because doctors use forceps to separate, terminate, and remove the fetus. SB8 requires doctors to use alternative fetal-death methods.

The district court declared SB8 facially unconstitutional. It held that SB8 imposes an undue burden on a large fraction of women, primarily because it determined that SB8 amounted to a ban on all D&E abortions. But viewing SB8 through a binary framework—that either D&Es can be done only by live dismemberment or else women cannot receive abortions in the second trimester—is to accept a false dichotomy. Instead, the record shows that doctors can safely perform D&Es and comply with SB8 using methods that are already in widespread use. In permanently enjoining SB8, the district court committed numerous, reversible legal and factual errors: applying the wrong test to assess SB8, disregarding and misreading the Supreme Court’s precedents in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey and Gonzales v. Carhart, and bungling the large-fraction analysis. Accordingly, we VACATE the district court’s permanent injunction.

Moreover, remanding to the district court would be futile here because the record permits only one conclusion. The plaintiffs have failed to carry their heavy burden of proving that SB8 would impose an undue burden on a large fraction of women. We REVERSE and RENDER.»

«The plurality claims that the district court erred by treating the State’s interest in preserving fetal life as “only [a] marginal consideration” that has “its primary application once the fetus is capable of living outside the womb.”»

«The lower court “committed numerous, reversible legal and factual errors»

* * * * * * *

Negli Stati Uniti si fa un gran vociare sull’aborto perché è parte integrante dell’ideologia liberal.

Ogni atto pubblico, legge o sentenza, che ne limiti la portata è percepito dai democratici come un attacco.

Senza questa politicizzazione estrema, questo argomento non comparirebbe nemmeno nelle cronache.

Si deve invece notare come i giudici dipartimentali di credo liberal boccino sistematicamente ogni legge che disciplini l’aborto, salvo poi essere smentiti dalle Corti Superiori, anche con parole avvilenti.

«The lower court “committed numerous, reversible legal and factual errors»