Texas ‘Heartbeat Bill’ Takes Effect After SCOTUS Refuses To Enforce Emergency Stay

Written by Wes Walker on September 2, 2021

Become a Clash Insider!

Big Tech is clamping down on conservative media big time. Don’t let Big Tech pre-chew your news. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we’ll make sure to keep you in the loop.

The pro-life camp scored a legislative win when neither lower courts nor SCOTUS ordered a ‘stay’ on Texas legislation that narrowed the conditions under which abortion can be performed.

If reports of the money Planned Parenthood makes on reselling fetal body parts ‘for science’ are accurate, this decision could have a negative impact on their bottom line. In other words, somebody might NOT be getting that Lambo they had their eye on.

The conflict in the abortion question has always been a battle over the conflict between the autonomy rights of the mother and the right to life of the child in her womb.

Blue states have actively pushed for a wider window of opportunity for abortion — some states wiping out any limitation whatsoever. This pushed those states into territory that only 5 other countries in the world have occupied on the legal status of abortion. Two of those countries include North Korea and China. Only seven countries in the world permit abortions beyond the 20th week.

Red States have moved in exactly the opposite direction.

A new Texas law has relocated the legal moment at which the baby’s right to life takes precedence to the time when the heartbeat can be detected. The law came into effect on September 1, and it was signed by Governor Abbot. But this one has a twist: the penalties are civil in nature, not criminal.

What makes the Texas law different is its unusual enforcement scheme. Rather than have officials responsible for enforcing the law, private citizens are authorized to sue abortion providers and anyone involved in facilitating abortions. Among other situations, that would include anyone who drives a woman to a clinic to get an abortion. Under the law, anyone who successfully sues another person would be entitled to at least $10,000.

… CNN also pointed out that other “heartbeat bills” have been stayed before they were allowed to go into effect, making the Texas law an interesting exception. But the Supreme Court is not alone in refusing to rule on the stay; a lower federal court also refused to block the law because, unlike other “heartbeat” laws, the Texas measure authorizes civil — not criminal penalties.

“In the novel legal strategy, the state Legislature designed the law to prevent government officials from directly enforcing it. The move was meant to make it much more difficult to bring a pre-enforcement challenge because there are not the usual government officials to hold accountable in court,” CNN added. “Instead, the law allows private citizens — anywhere in the country — to bring civil suits against anyone who assists a pregnant person seeking an abortion in violation of the ban.”

“The patient may not be sued, but doctors, staff members at clinics, counselors, people who help pay for the procedure, even an Uber driver taking a patient to an abortion clinic are all potential defendants,” the New York Times reported. “Plaintiffs, who need not have any connection to the matter or show any injury from it, are entitled to $10,000 and their legal fees recovered if they win. Prevailing defendants are not entitled to legal fees.” –DailyWire

Because there are no criminal implications in this law, neither the lower courts nor SCOTUS have seen fit to order a stay of the legislation until after the courts could rule on the inevitable court challenge. And so, it is now legally in force.

The law, which was signed by Governor Greg Abbott in May this year, allows private citizens to sue those breaching the rule even if they have not been harmed.

Texans can seek up to $10,000 in damages against abortion providers and possibly even those involved in the process such as staff and family members.

Exemptions to the Heartbeat Act include a medical emergency which must be confirmed by a doctor but not pregnancies caused by rape.

The ACLU has warned the law could give rise to “vigilante lawsuits” leading to the harassment of women seeking an abortion. –SkyNews

Vigilante lawsuits? Are they serious? The ACLU specializes in ‘vigilante lawsuits’. Nice try, though.

There will still be another shoe to drop on this issue. More than one, really.

First, the court has to hear the case and make an ultimate ruling. Then the Democrats will look for some kind of a way to insist that there is the jurisdiction for the federal government to push their will on all 50 states.

How do we know they’re planning to do that? Because they’ve already said so.

President Joe Biden said in a statement that the law “blatantly violates the constitutional right established under Roe v. Wade and upheld as precedent for nearly half a century.” He said the law “outrageously” gives private citizens the power “to bring lawsuits against anyone who they believe has helped another person get an abortion.”

Likewise, the American Medical Association said it was deeply disturbed by “this egregious law” and disappointed by the Supreme Court’s inaction.

The law “not only bans virtually all abortions in the state, but it interferes in the patient-physician relationship and places bounties on physicians and health care workers simply for delivering care,” said a statement from Dr. Gerald E. Harmon, the AMA president.

…Clinics have said the law would rule out 85% of abortions in Texas and force many clinics to close. Planned Parenthood is among the abortion providers that have stopped scheduling abortions beyond six weeks from conception. —AP

We have all seen, that what Planned Parenthood WANTS, the Democrats give them. Because Planned Parenthood owns the Democrats, lock, stock, and barrel.