Courts & Law

Questions for Martha McSally: What exactly is your position on abortion rights and ‘Personhood’ legislation?

by

chickenbunkerThe Arizona Republic was patting itself on the back this weekend for How The Republic gets candidates to talk about issues. Well maybe, but with the glaring exception of the one candidate who will not take a position on any issue, Tea-Publican Martha McSally in CD 2, who is still hiding in her chicken bunker.

Case in point, The Republic asked the congressional candidates their stance on Rep. Trent Franks’ (R-AZ) bill to impose a 20-week gestation period for access to abortion. This is the federal version of the anti-choice forced-birth model legislation enacted by several state legislatures including Arizona, which has been stayed by every court to have considered the model legislation, pending a final order striking down the law as unconstitutional. (It is in direct conflict with the 24-week gestation period in Roe v. Wade).

uterus-stateEvery Tea-Publican running for Congress in Arizona answered they would support Franks’ bill to restrict a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion and her right to privacy in medical consultation with her physician, making her uterus the “property of the state” and subject to the dictates of Big Brother the state — Arizona candidates’ stands on abortion limits — with the exception of Martha McSally: “Republican Martha McSally did not respond.”

Martha McSally has previously gone on the record about abortion during the 2012 campaign. The Tucson Weekly reported Akin and Abortion: Southern AZ Congressional Candidates:

In the Congressional District 2 race, Republican Martha McSally also told the Center for Arizona Policy that she opposed abortion in cases of rape and incest.

In a February interview with the Weekly, McSally [first responded “I believe in the sanctity of all human life” but] declined to state her position on legal abortion in cases of rape or incest, saying that “legislators are not really involved in this issue right now. We have a Supreme Court decision, and so I’ll be focusing on things that the House of Representatives needs to be doing.”

[Hence The Republic’s question about Rep. Trent Franks’ 20-week abortion bill approved by the Tea-Publican House earlier this year. No dodging this question this year, lady.]

But last week, McSally spokesman Bruce Harvie told TW that McSally opposes abortion rights but “supports exemptions for rape, incest and the life of mothers.”

Harvie said that McSally considered Akin’s comments to be “absolutely reprehensible.”

The Tucson Weekly reported a few days later in Choice Politics, “Harvie said that McSally would also be clarifying her stance with the Center for Arizona Policy.”

Read more

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear same-sex marriage appeals from Idaho and Nevada in September

by

EqualIn early March, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals scheduled oral arguments in Nevada’s same-sex marriage case, Sevcik v. Sandoval, for April 9th in San Francisco. Shortly thereafter, however, the Court of Appeals cancelled the April 9 date for argument without explanation.

The oral argument was believed to have been cancelled due to a judge of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sua sponte requesting an en banc hearing in SmithKline Beecham v. Abbott Laboratories, a case that  involved whether gay people could be kept off a jury in a trial. (The SmithKline Beecham heightened scrutiny standard of review had caused the state of Nevada to drop its defense of the state’s same-sex marriage ban in Sevcik v. Sadoval).

The court requested both parties to file briefs on whether the court should rehear SmithKline Beecham. Both parties asserted that the underlying standard for evaluating sexual-orientation discrimination claims did not warrant further review.

The SmithKline Beecham panel has not issued its mandate to the parties, and the 9th Circuit has not yet announced the result of its internal poll of judges to determine whether to hold an en banc reconsideration (polling of the judges was to have concluded at the end of this past week). An announcement of en banc review would effectively cancel the panel decision in SmithKline Beecham as a precedent.

Read more

RNC sues to destroy what remains of McCain-Feingold

by

I warned you about this GOP assault on campaign finance laws earlier this month. GOP seeks to destroy what remains of McCain-Feingold. The lawsuit has now been filed with the intent that it eventually make its way to the conservative activist U.S. Supreme Court. G.O.P. Sues for a Loophole to Raise Unlimited Money From Individuals:

Screenshot from 2014-04-02 14:06:21The Republican National Committee filed a complaint on Friday to force federal election officials to allow the party to raise unlimited money from individuals, opening a new front in its legal battle on campaign regulation.

The lawsuit, filed in United States District Court for the District of Columbia by the national committee along with the Republican organization of Louisiana, would open a loophole in the 12-year-old law banning parties from raising unlimited checks from wealthy donors, unions and corporations, known as “soft money.”

If successful, the suit would allow party officials to solicit large contributions from their party’s biggest givers to pay for independent advertising campaigns on behalf of party candidates, similar to those waged in recent elections by “super PACs” and other outside groups. The suit does not challenge the ban on contributions from corporations and unions, though it leaves open the possibility of doing so later.

Read more

U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania strikes down that state’s same-sex marriage ban

by

U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III for the U.S.District Court for Pennsylvania today struck down that state’s same-sex marriage ban as unconstitutional. U.S. judge strikes down same-sex marriage ban in Pa.:

EqualA federal judge on Tuesday struck down Pennsylvania’s ban on same-sex marriages, a landmark ruling that appeared to clear the way for the Commonwealth to become the latest state to legalize gay marriage.

The decision by U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III marked the first and most significant to date in a series of court challenges to the state’s 1996 ban.

“We are better people than what these laws represent, and it is time to discard them onto the ash heap of history,” Jones wrote in a thirty-nine-page opinion (.pdf). “By virtue of this ruling, same-sex couples who seek to marry in Pennsylvania may do so, and already married same-sex couples will be recognized as such in the Commonwealth.”

It was not immediately clear if Gov. Corbett, whose administration had defended the law, would appeal the decision. It has 30 days to do so.

Read more

10th Circuit grants stay pending appeal in proof-of-citizenship voter registration case

by

NoVoteThe 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted a stay pending the appeal of the district court order in Kobach v. U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) requiring the EAC to modify the federal National Voter Registration form to require documentary proof of citizenship for Arizona and Kansas residents. Court extends stay in Arizona, Kansas voting case:

A federal appeals court has delivered a new setback to officials in Arizona and Kansas, ruling that residents in those states can continue registering to vote using a federal form without having to show proof of citizenship.

* * *

Earlier this month, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver issued a stay of a lower court ruling ordering the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to immediately modify its federal voter registration form to add special instructions for Arizona and Kansas residents about those states’ proof-of-citizenship requirements.

Late Monday, the appeals court extended its block on the lower court order and granted an expedited hearing on the merits of the case sought by the federal commission and voting rights groups.

Kobach has said if the courts do not allow the federal form to be revised, he would implement a system in Kansas allowing people who register using the federal form to vote only in federal races such as for president and members of Congress.

Read the Stay Order here (.pdf).

Read more