I just read a story that makes my blood boil, so much so that I am driven to write my first diary in almost two months. Update [2005-10-15 21:58:35 by jsmdlawyer]: As my lovely wife pointed out, actually, she saw the latest version of the story before I did, and told me about it. She also spent most of the day with the kids, while I filed half a dozen bankruptcy petitions before the abomination of a new bankruptcy law kicks in on Monday. But I digress. The important thing is, kudos to the wife -- as usual.

The story goes like this:  a woman serving a sentence for violation of probation in Missouri is 16-17 weeks pregnant.  She wants an abortion, and is willing to pay for it.  The State of Missouri, however, refuses to allow her to get it, due to a state law that forbids the expenditure of state money to perform or assist in performing an abortion except to save the life of the mother.  Missouri will have to pay for security to transport her to and from the abortion clinic, about $350.

Read on for more. . . .

So she goes to court.  The federal district court sides with her, saying the state is infringing her right to an abortion.  The state appeals -- the Eighth Circuit turns the State down.

Then the state goes to the Supreme Court, and our good friend, Clarence Thomas, GRANTS A FUCKING STAY of the district court order.  Mind you, all the state is really complaining about is money -- which can NEVER be the basis of a stay, because money can always be compensated later if it is determined that the money should have been paid by her and not the state.

Here's the  story.  Judicial activism?  Fuck, this is judicial attention deficit disorder, it's so overactive.  Any lawyer familiar with the process for getting a stay of a court order will tell you that this is so far out of bounds that you need binoculars to see it from the playing field of normal judicial behavior.

Note from the story -- abortion is illegal in Missouri after 22 weeks.  And remember, Missouri isn't saying she can't have an abortion, just that they won't pay for anything connected with it (which is a questionable interpretation of the law in any event, but that's a different issue).  What Thomas is doing, so clearly and so transparently, is attempting to run out the clock on her so that she can't have an abortion in Missouri.  Maybe the woman should deliver this unwanted child to Clarence Thomas to care for and raise, since he's so fucking concerned with it.

I don't know about anyone else, but I say, let's take up a fucking collection for the piddly $350 and give it to this poor woman and let her get an abortion.  Is someone able to set this up for contributions?  I'm in for $100 if you can.

Clarence Thomas is an embarrassment to the practice of law and decent judicial conduct.  The fact that he is on the Supreme Court and even worse, is held up as a paragon of conservative virtue, is repugnant to everything I believe as a practicing lawyer.  He deserves a special place in hell.

Originally posted to jsmdlawyer on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 06:02 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.