Iowa Judge To Temporarily Block Most Extreme Anti-Abortion Law In Country

Pro-abortion rights counter protesters hold signs while anti-abortion demonstrators march past the Supreme Court in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 22, 2015, during the annual March for Life. Thousands of anti-abortion de... Pro-abortion rights counter protesters hold signs while anti-abortion demonstrators march past the Supreme Court in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 22, 2015, during the annual March for Life. Thousands of anti-abortion demonstrators are gathering in Washington for an annual march to protest the Supreme Court's landmark 1973 decision that declared a constitutional right to abortion. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin) MORE LESS

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A judge will temporarily block the most restrictive abortion law in the country from taking effect in Iowa next month under an agreement between lawyers for the state and abortion rights groups.

Attorneys for the state and Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds agreed Friday to prevent the law from taking effect on July 1 after discussions with the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, Planned Parenthood Federation of American and the Emma Goldman Clinic.

The advocacy groups have sued the state to block the law, which bans most abortions if a fetal heartbeat can be detected.

An attorney for the state says the goal is to quickly get the case before a judge to argue the law it’s constitutional.

Judge Michael Huppert said during a court hearing Friday that he’ll issue a temporary injunction later in the day.

Reynolds signed the law May 2, two days after lawmakers approved it.

8
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for 10c 10c says:

    An attorney for the state says the goal is to quickly get the case before a judge to argue the law it’s constitutional.

    They’ve reached the point where they’re actually proud that the strategy is to use the courts to get rulings that chip away at the body of law supporting the status quo. On this and so many other issues, and for decades now, R’s pass laws disingenuously, knowing they are illegal or unconstitutional and will face suits as soon as they are signed into law. When rulings further their agenda, they are let stand. When rulings are against their agenda, they appeal endlessly in order to move the cases up the line to the SC, where they know they’ll get a friendly hearing. The present SC aids the process by reaching down into lower courts’ dockets and elevating cases to the SC before they have received thorough lower courts’ review, and they can rule on the arguments instead of only the lower court’s findings as would pertain if it were appellate review; Alito is a great champion of this and Roberts is his willing toady.

    The party that constantly rails against “activist judges making law” has always used the courts to legislate, by getting hearings in front of friendly, activist judges.

  2. Yes, keep those farmers focused on a Culture Wars issue in order to distract them from falling crop prices due to Trump’s Trade War…

  3. The law is blatantly unconstitutional.
    That’s why they passed it.

    The 'pro-life" idiots want something not much different from what happens in North Korea regarding individual liberties and personal freedoms.

  4. Avatar for tena tena says:

    I’m so tired of being their go-to to kick around.

  5. Howling mob demanding the judge’s impeachment ready in 3, 2, 1 …

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

2 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for keninmn Avatar for vlharpley Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for tena Avatar for brian512 Avatar for 10c

Continue Discussion