UPDATE: A federal judge has smacked down Judge Lee Yeakel by reinstating most of the Texas abortion ban, which Yeakal earlier found to be unconstitutional.
People’s Pundit Daily had previously reported that considerable precedent has already been established for banning abortion beyond the 20 week mark, which in reality, is a five month old baby, who science has also established feels pain.
DEVELOPING: A federal judge in Texas has declared the Texas abortion ban unconstitutional.
The judge was expected to rule Monday on the constitutionality of a hotly debated Texas law imposing limits on late-term abortions before the measure took effect Tuesday. It will now be held up until the ruling is appeal.
American lend broad support for late-term abortion bans, such as the Texas abortion ban, but abortionists in Planned Parent and the Center for Reproductive Rights are protecting the billion dollar industry disguised as a woman’s right to choose.
Last week, Austin-based U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel heard three days of testimony and arguments about the abortion law.
He said he would rule before it’s implemented.
“The abortion issue is a big issue in this country and it’s a divisive issue,” Yeakel said. But he added that he’s only interested if Texas’ new law is constitutional: “This court is not to rule on whether women should be allowed to have abortions … or my personal beliefs.”
But the first comment gave away the personal opinions Judge Yeakel holds.
The law passed the GOP-controlled legislature with overwhelming support, despite a filibuster-like speech in June by Democratic Rep. Wendy Davis, who is now running for governor. After failing to win the debate, liberal abortionists on the fringe of the abortion debate have taken their argument to liberal, activist judges as is typical of their tactics.
Mississippi passed a similar law last year, which a federal judge also blocked pending a trial scheduled to begin in March. Mississippi’s attorney general asked the 5th Circuit to lift the temporary injunction so the law could be enforced, but the judges have left it in place signaling they believe there is a legitimate constitutional question.
Unlike the Mississippi case, Yeakel’s order is a final decision, setting the groundwork for the 5th Circuit to review the merits of the law, not just an injunction against it.