Lawyers being lawyers are always using words to twist the facts to support their case. This is especially true when they know the facts really are against their position or their client's position.
Ken Cuccinelli has just stepped over that line with his new announced opinion on regulating abortion clinics. Cucconelli has a long history of being against any individual exercising their constitutional rights. This includes women which Cuccinelli has made a center piece of his political career.
The sole purpose of Cuccinelli's recent opinion is to shut down access by women and families to healthcare facilities. It not about protecting their rights but to eliminate those rights from being exercised.
In a Richmond Times Dispatch article, Cuccinelli-approved rules threaten abortion clinics it is reported that clinics that Cuccinelli is opposed to allowing to exist will be shut down. What Cuccinelli has stated as an opinion to implement obstructions to healthcare clinics with the intended purpose to destroy their existence.
Two of the Richmond area's three abortion clinics do not meet the standards for an outpatient surgery center and would be at risk of closing if stiffer regulations authorized by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli are enacted, say critics of the proposed rules.
Statewide, up to 17 abortion clinics would be at risk of closing, according to an abortion-rights group.
Cuccinelli, a Republican, issued an opinion Aug. 20 that suggests the Virginia Board of Health has the authority to impose additional regulations on the state's abortion clinics.
If stricter rules are put in place, "we could see 17 of the 21 abortion providers disappear from Virginia, eliminating women's access to abortion and other services, such as birth control," said Tarina Keene, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia, in a statement.
Courts have limited the definition of obstructing legal process by narrowly construing the statute.
In State v. Krawsky, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that interrupting or directing criticism
towards an officer does not constitute a violation of obstruction of legal process.4 In doing so, the
court differentiated Minn. Stat. § 609.50 from a Houston, Texas ordinance that was struck down
by the United States Supreme Court for being overbroad.5 Instead, the Minnesota Supreme Court
held that to be found guilty of obstruction of legal process, the defendant must act in way that
physically hinders an officer in the performance of his or her duties.6 The court described a
physical obstruction as “not merely interrupting an officer but substantially frustrating or hindering
the officer in the performance of his duties.”7
According to The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE or the Access Act, Pub. L. No. 103-259, 108 Stat. 694) (May 26, 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 248) this is clearly against the law. The intend to implement obstructions to healthcare clinics or destruction of a healthcare facility or place or worship is against the law. Let's be clear Cuccinelii is taking the position that the government of Virginia can and should do something against the LAW. Here is a summation of that law.
The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE or the Access Act, Pub. L. No. 103-259, 108 Stat. 694) (May 26, 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 248) is a United States law that was signed by President Bill Clinton in May of 1994, which prohibits the following three things: (1) the use of physical force, threat of physical force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person who is obtaining reproductive health services or providing reproductive health services (this portion of the law typically refers to abortion clinics), (2) the use of physical force, threat of physical force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person who is exercising or trying to exercise their First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship, (3 ) the intentional damage or destruction of a reproductive health care facility or a place of worship[1][2]
Cuccinelli is more serious trouble than he realizes. The Constitution of Virginia, Article II - Franchise and Officers clearly makes the point "I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me". Depriving citizens of constitutional rights is in clear violation of his Oath of office.
Section 7. Oath or affirmation.
All officers elected or appointed under or pursuant to this Constitution shall, before they enter on the performance of their public duties, severally take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me as ...................., according to the best of my ability (so help me God)."
While the GOP controlled Virginia legislature will never impeach Cuccinelli, he is none the less guilty.
Constitution of Virginia
Article IV - Legislature
Section 17. Impeachment.
The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, judges, members of the State Corporation Commission, and all officers appointed by the Governor or elected by the General Assembly, offending against the Commonwealth by malfeasance in office, corruption, neglect of duty, or other high crime or misdemeanor may be impeached by the House of Delegates and prosecuted before the Senate, which shall have the sole power to try impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, the senators shall be on oath or affirmation, and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the senators present. Judgment in case of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the Commonwealth; but the person convicted shall nevertheless be subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment according to law. The Senate may sit during the recess of the General Assembly for the trial of impeachments.
Will the lawyers fight for the rights of the citizens or for the right wing religious extremists to impose their religion on the rest of the citizens?
Update:
Destruction is the concept of damage to an object, system, or being. It may apply either as a measurable degree of damage up to and including a state beyond use or repair, or it may indicate a state wherein such damage is occurring and continuing. Something 'being destroyed' is in a 'state of destruction.'