Supreme Court Rules States Cannot Place “Undue Burdens” On A Woman’s Right To Murder Her Child

The Supreme Court decided the constitution is pro-baby murder again yesterday.

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a tough Louisiana law regulating abortion clinics, reasserting a commitment to abortion rights in the first big abortion case of President Trump’s administration.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined with four liberal-appointed justices in ruling that the law requiring doctors who perform abortions have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals violates the abortion right the court first announced in the landmark Roe v. Wade decision in 1973.

In two previous abortion cases, Roberts, appointed by George W. Bush, had favored restrictions.

The Louisiana law is virtually identical to one in Texas that the court struck down — with Roberts voting against it — in 2016.

“The result in this case is controlled by our decision four years ago invalidating a nearly identical Texas law,” Roberts wrote, although he did not join the opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer.

Conservative-appointed Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a stinging dissent.

“Today a majority of the Court perpetuates its ill-founded abortion jurisprudence by enjoining a perfectly legitimate state law and doing so without jurisdiction,” Thomas wrote.

Trump’s two appointees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, dissented, along with Justice Samuel Alito.

The presence of the new justices is what fueled hopes among abortion opponents, and fears on the other side, that the Supreme Court would be more likely to uphold restrictions.

A trial judge had said the law would not provide health benefits to women and would leave only one clinic open in Louisiana, in New Orleans. That would make it too hard for women to get an abortion, in violation of the Constitution, the judge ruled.

Basically, Justice Roberts hid behind the court’s previous ruling in 2016, so he didn’t disappoint his masters in 2020. A ruling, by the way, that Roberts ruled against back in 2016. God will be his judge.

I have always found the language surrounding abortion to be revealing. The anti-baby murderers stand against abortion because it is, well, murder. It’s pretty plain Jane and it requires no further explication. Unless you’re a cuck trying to justify the mob behavior of black guys grieving over St. Black Floyd, literally everyone is in agreement that murder is wrong, or that, at least, it cannot be legally tolerated in society.

The baby-muderers have a number of ways to evade the issue to maintain their solipsism.

The first one I noticed- and the one that is still their go-to- is that abortion is primarily about a “Woman’s right.”

“Killing babies is wrong!”

“No. It’s a woman’s right!”

“…What?”

The Left is so deeply committed to Feminism that a woman’s convenience is esteemed to be of more value than the life of a child. So much so that they cannot even acknowledge that a baby is being killed in the process. A child’s life is sacrificed on the altar of the right of a woman to continue to ride the cock carousel, remain I-N-D-E-P-E-N-D-E-N-T, and work her way up to glorious lower management.

There is also the wordspell that seems to be more recent in origin, which calls abortion “reproductive rights.” It’s brilliant rhetoric. It steals turf from pro-lifers by utilizing what should be their own vocabulary. Except, it’s a complete lie. Abortion has nothing to do with the rights to reproduce, as if we were living in China and the government were restricting a woman’s ability to bear a child. (Stay-tuned for that, by the way, in case the satanists win the culture war. They’ll be mandating women having abortions to offset climate change.) I suppose “Child sacrifice rights” just does not have the same ring to it.

I was reminded of all of this obfuscation yesterday when I noticed one of the justices commenting on how the Louisianna law placed an undue burden on a woman’s right to an abortion.

Undue burden?

I am currently in the process of starting a business. I live in a Red state and consequently there are less regulations than if I were to have started my business in a Blue state. Also, my business is in a particular industry where there is less regulation as long as it conducted on a small-scale. (Woohoo! Freedom! ‘Merica! Outlaw Country!) Still, even though there are relatively less regulations for me compared to someone else operating a business in a different industry, there are still absolutely a ton of regulations.

On the other hand, baby murder is such a perceived fundamental right in the eyes of our legal overlords that it cannot be subjected to such petty regulations. It’s so foundational to a woman’s Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness- killing babies, that is- that a state government is not even “Constitutionally” allowed to place a small hurdle in a woman’s path to filicide. This remains true even when the regulation is their to protect the mother who is attempting to kill her child.

Think about that for a second.

Our country is so deeply satanic that it institutionally prevents any legal entity from placing any burden in front of a would be murderous mother.

Our country is run by worshippers of Molech.

#Abortion #SupremeCourt #SCOTUS #Louisianna #ReproductiveRights

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: