Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government
Jackson, who dissented in part to the ruling, said the decision was “not a victory for pregnant patients in Idaho,” even though emergency rooms in
The newest Supreme Court justice continued, saying, “Not doing anything is problematic,” arguing the court had the opportunity “to bring clarity and certainty to this tragic situation, and we have squandered it.” Alito responded to her dissent by arguing her opinion “adds nothing” to Justice Elena Kagan’s legal analysis.
“But she reads my opinion to suggest ‘that States have free rein to nullify federal law’ … anyone who reads my opinion can see that it makes no such suggestion but simply explains what the federal law in question means,” he wrote.The 6-3 ruling allowed emergency abortions in Idaho but did not strike down the state’s abortion ban as Jackson would have liked, with her saying the state “law must yield” because it clearly conflicts with federal law.
“Will this Court just have a do-over, rehearing and rehashing the same arguments we are considering now, just at a comparatively more convenient point in time?” she rhetorically asked. “Or maybe we will keep punting on this issue altogether, allowing chaos to reign wherever lower courts enable States to flagrantly undercut federal law, facilitating the suffering of people in need of urgent medical treatment.
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court justices disclose book advances, including $900,000 for JacksonThe Supreme Court justices are limited in earning outside income, but not for writing books. Here's what they got recently.
Read more »
Neil Gorsuch Compares Liberal Supreme Court Justices to 'Picky Child'Gorsuch criticized his liberal colleagues' approach to the law in a lengthy concurring opinion on Thursday.
Read more »
Supreme Court Justices Put Ideology Over Impartiality, Poll FindsPoll finds Americans don't trust the Supreme Court to remain impartial and are influenced by their own personal ideologies.
Read more »
7 in 10 Americans think Supreme Court justices put ideology over impartiality: AP-NORC pollAs the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on a major case involving former President Donald Trump, 7 in 10 Americans think its justices are more likely to shape the law to fit their own ideology, rather than serving as neutral arbiters of government authority.
Read more »
7 in 10 think Supreme Court justices prioritize ideology: AP pollAs the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on a major case involving former President Donald Trump, 7 in 10 Americans think its justices are more likely to shape the law to fit their own ideology, rather than serving as neutral arbiters of government authority.
Read more »
7 in 10 Americans think Supreme Court justices put ideology over impartiality: AP-NORC pollAs the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on a major case involving former President Donald Trump, 7 in 10 Americans think its justices are more likely to shape the law to fit their own ideology, rather than serving as neutral arbiters of government authority.
Read more »