Reasons of change

[webfact]

Court orders Trump administration to give immigrant teens abortion access

By Sarah N. Lynch

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. District Court judge ruled on Monday that President Donald Trump's administration must allow access to abortion for two pregnant teenagers who are in the country illegally, escalating a high-profile legal fight.

 

Judge Tanya Chutkan put her order on hold, however, to give the U.S. Justice Department time to appeal her ruling.

 

The Justice Department filed its notice of appeal shortly afterward to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

 

The judge's temporary restraining order marked the latest chapter in a legal dispute with the Trump administration over whether minors who are illegal immigrants have the right to seek an abortion during their detention.

 

The issue was ignited by a 17-year-old who petitioned the court in October to have an abortion, and ultimately had the procedure over the Trump administration's objections.

 

In that instance, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled on Oct. 24 that the teen could have an abortion immediately, rejecting the administration’s opposition.

 

The two 17-year-olds in the latest legal action, known to the court as Jane Roe and Jane Poe, requested abortions, but the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement has refused to allow them access to the procedure.

 

In her ruling, Chutkan wrote that the girls' "constitutional right to decide whether to carry their pregnancies to term" needed to be preserved.

 

She also noted they were likely to succeed on the legal merits of their case, based on the prior ruling in the higher court.

 

“We are deeply disappointed in the decision to grant a temporary restraining order that will compel HHS to facilitate abortions for minors when they are not medically necessary," a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said in a statement.

 

"A pregnant minor who has entered the country illegally has the option to voluntarily depart to her home country or identify a suitable sponsor. HHS-funded facilities that provide temporary shelter and care for unaccompanied alien minors should not become way stations for these children to get taxpayer-facilitated abortions.”

 

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Editing by Peter Cooney)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-12-19

[thaibeachlovers]

I'm with the judge on this. I believe in the right to abortion within first trimester for any female of any age of any nationality, wherever they may be, ie abortion as a right to all women without any conditions whatsoever and no need for permission from anyone. Free as well

 

If people won't use birth control then day after pill or abortion.

 

There are too many people on this planet. Let's do anything we can to reduce the population without war or plague.

[hawker9000]

Tanya S. Chutkan - Obama appointee, 2014.   (So is her husband, BTW...)

 

[mamypoko]

No fear of either of them bringing Satan into the world. That ship has sailed.

[riclag]

"In her ruling, Chutkan wrote that the girls' "constitutional right to decide whether to carry their pregnancies to term" needed to be preserved".

 

 

BS on the constitutional rights for illegals 

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[ilostmypassword]

*Deleted post edited out*

 

You should get acquainted with the 14th amendment to the constitution. It does't address just citizens' rights, it doesn't just address legal residents' right, it address the rights of persons in the USA. They are absolutely entitled to protection under the Constitution.

Edited December 19, 2017 by Scott

[ilostmypassword]

One of my favorite things about this is that the Trump administration is working hard to create what the anti--immigrant right calls "anchor babies". Because when those babies are born in the USA they are U.S. citizens.

[Guest Jerry787]

the craziness of trump and his administration proves every day to be the extract of ignorance and decadence, showing the immense stupidity of who voted for him.

Insert other media

[riclag]

1 hour ago, Jerry787 said:

the craziness of trump and his administration proves every day to be the extract of ignorance and decadence, showing the immense stupidity of who voted for him.

Insert other media

Two very controversial subjects,Illegal immigrants and abortions.   

I don't know you or your country of origin.Perhaps your country will accommodate illegals? There are many countries that will perform a abortion when it's not medically necessary for free, even if your in their country illegal.My country is currently going through a  transition now of taking care of itself first(America First). PT campaigned on a pro life agenda,with abortions being performed with tax payer monies on a medically necessary basis . Unfortunately some people don't agree with what most American's voted for.Change takes time and with that new judges appointed to carry out the law. 

http://www.lifenews.com/2017/02/09/eight-countries-will-pay-for-free-abortions-after-trump-defunded-international-planned-parenthood/

[ilostmypassword]

55 minutes ago, riclag said:

Two very controversial subjects,Illegal immigrants and abortions.   

I don't know you or your country of origin.Perhaps your country will accommodate illegals? There are many countries that will perform a abortion when it's not medically necessary for free, even if your in their country illegal.My country is currently going through a  transition now of taking care of itself first(America First). PT campaigned on a pro life agenda,with abortions being performed with tax payer monies on a medically necessary basis . Unfortunately some people don't agree with what most American's voted for.Change takes time and with that new judges appointed to carry out the law. 

http://www.lifenews.com/2017/02/09/eight-countries-will-pay-for-free-abortions-after-trump-defunded-international-planned-parenthood/

What most Americans voted for? As you clearly don't recall, Trump came in second in the popular vote. And as you clearly don't know, the Trump administration is denying the right to have an abortion even if the pregnant woman is using private funds. As the article noted this isn't about government funding. This is about the government denying access to the procedure.

[Trouble]

Happy to here about those underage illegals able to get abortions, as they won't have a US citizen baby to cling to.  They hopefully will be deported now. 

[ilostmypassword]

4 hours ago, Trouble said:

Happy to here about those underage illegals able to get abortions, as they won't have a US citizen baby to cling to.  They hopefully will be deported now. 

So you must be quite irate with the Trump government for trying to help create anchor babies? Or do you manage somehow to doublethink your way out of this one?

[mrwebb8825]

On 12/19/2017 at 6:42 PM, ilostmypassword said:

*Deleted post edited out*

 

You should get acquainted with the 14th amendment to the constitution. It does't address just citizens' rights, it doesn't just address legal residents' right, it address the rights of persons in the USA. They are absolutely entitled to protection under the Constitution.

Just another example of an antiquated document contradicting the newer laws. When the constitution was written, it was done so within the given knowledge of the times. There are parts of it that need to be amended so left-wing nutcase lawyers and judges can't possibly extend it to other countries that use it for toilet paper until it serves their purposes.

[Credo]

25 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Just another example of an antiquated document contradicting the newer laws. When the constitution was written, it was done so within the given knowledge of the times. There are parts of it that need to be amended so left-wing nutcase lawyers and judges can't possibly extend it to other countries that use it for toilet paper until it serves their purposes.

Agree.   Let's start with the 2nd amendment and see how it goes from there.   

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎12‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 6:43 PM, ilostmypassword said:

One of my favorite things about this is that the Trump administration is working hard to create what the anti--immigrant right calls "anchor babies". Because when those babies are born in the USA they are U.S. citizens.

I was considering whether to post that myself. Something we can agree on apparently.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I was considering whether to post that myself. Something we can agree on apparently.

I may have to reconsider my position.

[mrwebb8825]

5 hours ago, Credo said:

Agree.   Let's start with the 2nd amendment and see how it goes from there.   

the 2nd amendment deals with citizens. The only thing(s) that need amending is any part of the language that does NOT specify that it's the US Constitution and not a general set of guidelines established for any and everybody that sneaks in.

[ilostmypassword]

6 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Just another example of an antiquated document contradicting the newer laws. When the constitution was written, it was done so within the given knowledge of the times. There are parts of it that need to be amended so left-wing nutcase lawyers and judges can't possibly extend it to other countries that use it for toilet paper until it serves their purposes.

The 14 amendment was not part of "the constitution when it was written" nor one of the first 10 amendments that were added shortly afterwards. And exactly how is the 14 amendment extended to other countries?

[mrwebb8825]

20 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

The 14 amendment was not part of "the constitution when it was written" nor one of the first 10 amendments that were added shortly afterwards. And exactly how is the 14 amendment extended to other countries?

Do you even read what you write or is it just being opposite of everyone that makes this fun for you?

ilostmypassword said: "You should get acquainted with the 14th amendment to the constitution. It does't address just citizens' rights, it doesn't just address legal residents' right, it address the rights of persons in the USA. They are absolutely entitled to protection under the Constitution."

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Do you even read what you write or is it just being opposite of everyone that makes this fun for you?

ilostmypassword said: "You should get acquainted with the 14th amendment to the constitution. It does't address just citizens' rights, it doesn't just address legal residents' right, it address the rights of persons in the USA. They are absolutely entitled to protection under the Constitution."

If this sentence of mine "The 14 amendment was not part of "the constitution when it was written" nor one of the first 10 amendments that were added shortly afterwards. And exactly how is the 14 amendment extended to other countries?" was a stand-alone statement, you might have a point. But since it explicitly quotes you,  and was in reply to a comment you wrote, you don't. If you like, I can go into excruciating detail about why you don't have a case here. I can always make time in my day to do another good deed.

[mrwebb8825]

22 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

If this sentence of mine "The 14 amendment was not part of "the constitution when it was written" nor one of the first 10 amendments that were added shortly afterwards. And exactly how is the 14 amendment extended to other countries?" was a stand-alone statement, you might have a point. But since it explicitly quotes you,  and was in reply to a comment you wrote, you don't. If you like, I can go into excruciating detail about why you don't have a case here. I can always make time in my day to do another good deed.

let me save you some effort: The 14th amendment is an amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1868. It was primarily concerned with details of reintegrating the southern states after the Civil War and defining some of the rights of recently freed slaves.

 

It needs to be re-amended to stop silly-assed lawyers and liberal judges from altering it's intended purpose.

Edited December 22, 2017 by mrwebb8825

[ilostmypassword]

7 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

let me save you some effort: The 14th amendment is an amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1868. It was primarily concerned with details of reintegrating the southern states after the Civil War and defining some of the rights of recently freed slaves.

 

It needs to be re-amended to stop silly-assed lawyers and liberal judges from altering it's intended purpose.

It doesn't really address the question you raised of some sort of alleged contradiction between my 2 statements but thanks for the info.