Supreme Court’s Abortionism is Good for Trump

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
June 28, 2016

Pro-abortion rights supporters chant at the state Capitol in Austin, Texas, on Tuesday July 2, 2013. Gov. Rick Perry has called lawmakers back for another special session with abortion on the top of the agenda. (AP Photo/Austin American-Statesman, Jay Janner)

Allies of Paul Ryan

The Supreme Court has once again demonstrated that it has become an institution of brutal oppression, forcing the will of radical minorities groups on the masses, denying states and the people who live in the states the right to government themselves.

This recent extreme decision on abortionism is going to be very good for uniting the Republican base behind Trump, as it shows that the anti-Trump Republicans are endorsing the radical communist agenda of the ruling establishment by supporting Hillary.

Reuters:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Texas abortion law imposing strict regulations on doctors and facilities in the strongest endorsement of abortion rights in America in more than two decades.

The 5-3 ruling held that the Republican-backed 2013 Texas law placed an undue burden on women exercising their right under the U.S. Constitution to end a pregnancy, established in the court’s landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

The abortion providers who challenged the law said it was medically unnecessary and specifically intended to shut clinics.

Texas officials said it was intended to protect women’s health. The ruling means similar laws in other states are probably unconstitutional and could put in jeopardy other types of abortion restrictions enacted in various conservative states.

“The decision should send a loud signal to politicians that they can no longer hide behind sham rationales to shut down clinics and prevent a woman who has decided to end a pregnancy from getting the care she needs,” said Jennifer Dalven, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union.

President Barack Obama, whose administration backed the abortion providers in the court challenge, said in a statement he was “pleased to see the Supreme Court protect women’s rights and health” and that restrictions like those in Texas “harm women’s health and place an unconstitutional obstacle in the path of a woman’s reproductive freedom.”

Conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy joined the court’s four liberal members in the ruling, with the remaining three conservatives dissenting. The court declared that both key provisions of the law – requiring abortion doctors to have difficult-to-obtain “admitting privileges” at a local hospital and requiring clinics to have costly hospital-grade facilities – violated a woman’s right to an abortion.

Writing for the court, liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said, “We conclude that neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes.”

“Each places a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a pre-viability abortion, each constitutes an undue burden on abortion access, and each violates the federal Constitution,” Breyer added.

Deferring to state legislatures over “questions of medical uncertainty is also inconsistent with this court’s case law,” Breyer added.

The ruling in the case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, represented the most vigorous affirmation of abortion rights in the United States since a 1992 ruling affirmed a woman’s right to have the procedure.

The Texas law required abortion doctors to have “admitting privileges,” a type of formal affiliation, at a hospital within 30 miles (48 km) of the clinic so they can treat patients needing surgery or other critical care.

The law also required clinic buildings to possess costly, hospital-grade facilities. These regulations covered numerous building features such as corridor width, the swinging motion of doors, floor tiles, parking spaces, elevator size, ventilation, electrical wiring, plumbing, floor tiling and even the angle that water flows from drinking fountains.

Trump has made it clear that any judge he appoints will be pro-life. Obviously, any judge Hillary appoints will be pro-abortion.

Hillary-supporting anti-Trump Republicans such as Paul Ryan are pro-abortion, pro-invasion, pro-Islam, pro-gun control, pro-war, anti-family, pro-gay, pro-Black, anti-cop, pro-globalism, anti-American, etc.

And why?

Because they’re against Trump’s trade policies?

paul ryan cuckold bitch

The base of the GOP needs to wake up and begin viciously attacking Paul Ryan and the rest of these vile anti-American bastards.