en.news
112.7K

Supreme Judge Kavanaugh Has Already Betrayed

The U.S. Supreme Court Monday rebuffed efforts to block funding to the abortion network Planned Parenthood.

It refused to discuss two lower court opinions claiming that states violate federal law when terminating Medicaid contracts with Planned Parenthood.

It would have taken four justices to agree to hear the issue, but only three justices - Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch - voted to hear the case.

Chief Justice Roberts – highly praised by Pro Lifers when appointed justice in 2005 - and newly named Justice Brett Kavanaugh voted with the court's pro-death faction.

CreativeMinorityReport.com comments, "After all the push and fighting pro-lifers did to make sure Kavanaugh took a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, how could we not have expected to be betrayed as soon as possible?"

Picture: Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump, #newsVffrlwigou
  • Report

  • Social media

  • Change post

  • Remove post

Seidenspinner
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

GChevalier
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

Comme quoi, il ne faut pas s'y fier.
frjimanderson
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

Don't jump to conclusions. What has the man been through. Pray for him...and Roberts!
Seidenspinner
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas criticized his fellow justices Monday for refusing to do their job when they rejected a case about state efforts to defund the abortion giant Planned Parenthood. Thomas said the court made a “mess” of the matter, and blamed the other justices for not wanting to touch a case involving the abortion giant Planned Parenthood.
“What explains the court’s refusal …More
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas criticized his fellow justices Monday for refusing to do their job when they rejected a case about state efforts to defund the abortion giant Planned Parenthood. Thomas said the court made a “mess” of the matter, and blamed the other justices for not wanting to touch a case involving the abortion giant Planned Parenthood.

“What explains the court’s refusal to do its job here? I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood,’” Thomas wrote in his dissenting opinion.
alexamarie
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

I was told, he was waiting on a better case? The other case upheld the law. Pray for him and the whole supreme court for their conversion and to end Abortion in America! I hope there is more to the story......
mccallansteve
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

He is applauded by other Catholics such as ,Biden, Kerry, Pelosi,etc. However, God withheld His applause and will demand an accounting of your actions some day, judge.
Holy Cannoli
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

It’s a signal that the law needs to be changed in Congress, not the courts.
These were lawsuits by Planned Parenthood and some Jane Doe Medicaid beneficiaries suing to enjoin states from defunding Planned Parenthood. The cases are at the preliminary injunction stage. The issue that was presented to the Supreme Court was whether Medicaid beneficiaries have a private right of action under 42 U.S.C.…More
It’s a signal that the law needs to be changed in Congress, not the courts.

These were lawsuits by Planned Parenthood and some Jane Doe Medicaid beneficiaries suing to enjoin states from defunding Planned Parenthood. The cases are at the preliminary injunction stage. The issue that was presented to the Supreme Court was whether Medicaid beneficiaries have a private right of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the statute that allows individuals to sue for civil rights violations. Even if the Supreme Court granted certiorari (a writ or order by which a higher court reviews a decision of a lower court). they weren't going to decide whether the states had the power to defund Planned Parenthood.
aderito
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

For now the strategy is staying low
Don Reto Nay
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

@myunkie: So you think that Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch were mislead over this issue? Or the other way around: If it were bad for abortion (etc.) to hear the question, then, I guess, the liberal judges would have voted in favour of hearing the question?
myunkie
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

The legal question, can a state “single out” a single provider based on a chriteria not included in the original law. This would not have been heard as an abortion case. This would be more of a due process case. Kavenaugh and the rest thought the due process question was adequately answered by the lower courts while Alito et. al. thought something was missed at the District level. There is a good …More
The legal question, can a state “single out” a single provider based on a chriteria not included in the original law. This would not have been heard as an abortion case. This would be more of a due process case. Kavenaugh and the rest thought the due process question was adequately answered by the lower courts while Alito et. al. thought something was missed at the District level. There is a good chance neither side thought the case was about abortion rights.
myunkie
  • Report

  • Change comment

  • Remove comment

The Supreme court can only answer questions which are brought to it. In this case, the question, as I understand it, was, "If a state law allows the Medicaid recipients to use any qualified provider, can the state disqualify a provider for a reason not specified in the law?" The majority said, "no". While I find abortion abhorrent to my core, I can understand Roberts and Kavanaugh waiting for the …More
The Supreme court can only answer questions which are brought to it. In this case, the question, as I understand it, was, "If a state law allows the Medicaid recipients to use any qualified provider, can the state disqualify a provider for a reason not specified in the law?" The majority said, "no". While I find abortion abhorrent to my core, I can understand Roberts and Kavanaugh waiting for the right case, one that addresses public funding of abortion as a concept rather than one which abortionists can work around by simply having affiliated companies sell those precious little bodies for them.
Login
Create accountForgot password?