Started By
Message

re: Florida Judge Blocks Governor Ron DeSantis’s 15-Week Abortion Ban

Posted on 6/30/22 at 3:57 pm to
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 3:57 pm to
quote:

A state court judge, and state court of appeals judge, and a state supreme court justice are three different things
Maybe in Tennessee.

In every state where I have ever entered a courthouse, all of them are "judges." Some are district judges and some are appellate judges at different levels with different titles.

But all are "judges."
Posted by NC_Tigah
Member since Sep 2003
125447 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 3:58 pm to
quote:

abortion opponents won a HUGE battle last week.
The 10th Amendment won. Abortion limitation was ironically not a SCOTUS finding.

Now we all understand the resultant indirect ramifications.
But the observation is no small issue when THIS SCOTUS ruling is being labeled "radical" as opposed to the Burger SCOTUS ruling which it unwound, and which had essentially conjured a basis for RvW out of thin air.
This post was edited on 6/30/22 at 4:05 pm
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 3:59 pm to
quote:

I really think you are incorrect there. I'm fairly certain that almost every state elects the entire state judiciary.
See my link above, which summarizes every state's system.

Only seven states do not hold judicial elections of some type, whether partisan, nonpartisan or retention.
This post was edited on 6/30/22 at 4:00 pm
Posted by ShoeBang
Member since May 2012
19924 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:00 pm to
quote:

In every state where I have ever entered a courthouse, all of them are "judges." Some are district judges and some are appellate judges at different levels with different titles. But all are "judges."


Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
65976 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:01 pm to
quote:

But all are "judges."

Yes, they're all judges, never said they weren't. Not sure where you're drawing that distinction from my post.
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:02 pm to
quote:

ShoeBang
Obvious
Agreed. Perhaps you should tell "lsufball19"
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
41088 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:04 pm to
quote:

the state constitution guarantees a right to the procedure


does it though?
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:05 pm to
quote:

the state constitution guarantees a right to the procedure
quote:

does it though?

Seeking an answer to that question is why they now have a lawsuit and a TRO.

The TRO that the OP is whining about.
Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
65976 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:05 pm to
quote:

Only seven states do not hold judicial elections of some type, whether partisan, nonpartisan or retention.

29 states do not allow their voters to choose the supreme court justice they want, some do allow voters to choose to retain a judge but not to select a replacement. And your numbers are off on even allowing retention elections. 12 states allow no intervention or election period from voters in the state. Oddly enough, most of them are in the Northeast, as well as Hawaii, South Carolina, and Virginia.
Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
65976 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:06 pm to
quote:

Perhaps you should tell "lsufball19"

bud, you're going to need to show me where I said they weren't all judges. I'm very well aware of what a judge is. I practice in front of them every day

Unless you're trying to argue semantics here
This post was edited on 6/30/22 at 4:08 pm
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:07 pm to
quote:

And your numbers are off on even allowing retention elections.
I linked the source of the info I provided. You can link your source. Maybe we can find the disconnect.

Probably a definitional thing on one site or the other.
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
114036 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:11 pm to
quote:

does it though?


All the same people who said the right to privacy didn’t apply to people getting an elective procedure during Covid will now say that the right to privacy does apply to killing your baby.
Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
69814 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:14 pm to
quote:

The legal challenge in Florida hinges on a 1980 amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing a broad right to privacy, which has been interpreted by the state Supreme Court to include abortion. Florida voters reaffirmed the right to privacy in 2012 by rejecting a ballot initiative that would have weakened its protections, plaintiffs said.


Seems like a lower court judge relying on state president

Florida Supreme Court likely will have to follow the SCOTUS lead, but a constitutional right to privacy doesn’t exist in a federal level.
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:14 pm to
quote:

bud, you're going to need to show me where I said they weren't all judges. I'm very well aware of what a judge is. I practice in front of them every day

Unless you're trying to argue semantics here
IDF already raised the same issue. You said:
quote:

All state court judges are elected everywhere. State COA judges and state supreme court justices are appointed by governors
IOW, "all state court judges" are elected, but appellate justices are not. Implicit is that appellate justices are NOT "state court judges" because they are not elected. A Venn diagram with no overlap.

Presumably, you use the term "state court judge" to reference those called "district court judges" everywhere that I have ever heard of (except New York, where the normal district court is called a supreme court).

No big deal. We are all on the same page now.
This post was edited on 6/30/22 at 4:18 pm
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
41088 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:14 pm to
quote:

Seeking an answer to that question is why they now have a lawsuit and a TRO.

The TRO that the OP is whining about.


I figured you would be OK with Lawfare.

Here's a link to the State of Florida's constitution:
LINK
The word abortion doesnt appear in it. Not even once. The only language relative to abortion is about a parent's right to be notified before their minor child terminates a pregnancy.

This is advocacy - meant to "buy time" for women to murder their 15+ week old unborn babies before the courts can blast this stupid-arse case into the ether. You know it... I know it. And we shouldnt be OK with that.

Our courts have better things to do than indulge activists and politicians.
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:16 pm to
quote:

Our courts have better things to do than indulge activists and politicians.
Yep. Things like resolving differing interpretations of constitutions and statutes.
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
41088 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:17 pm to
this isnt that. stop it.
quote:


The legal challenge in Florida hinges on a 1980 amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing a broad right to privacy, which has been interpreted by the state Supreme Court to include abortion.


Apples and fricking bananas. The SCOTUS has already blasted this garbage. This is lawfare
This post was edited on 6/30/22 at 4:19 pm
Posted by GoT1de
Alabama
Member since Aug 2009
5041 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:19 pm to
Its a good age for lawyers.
Wonder how much these state disputes cost every year?
Probably about 350 impeachments.
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
42941 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:20 pm to
quote:

All the same people who said the right to privacy didn’t apply to people getting an elective procedure during Covid will now say that the right to privacy does apply to killing your baby.
Not all.

"My body, my choice" applies equally in both situations, IMHO (absent a true public health emergency, which COVID definitely was not).
This post was edited on 6/30/22 at 4:22 pm
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
41088 posts
Posted on 6/30/22 at 4:26 pm to
The same dems who think the right to privacy means you can kill your baby at 37 weeks have their thugs in the IC rifling through your metadata and browsing histories as we speak.

Hi Fed!
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram