Sid Miller Smacked Down RE: Texas Sonogram Law - 'Thinly Veiled Rhetoric*


 
Get Off Your Soapbox, Sid!

Sid Miller Smacked Down RE: Texas Sonogram Law - 'Thinly Veiled Rhetoric*
 


31 August 2011 at 11:10:02 AM
salon

Sid Miller is, of course, our Texas House Rep for District 59 and is also the one that sponsored that Big Government Intrusive Sonogram Bill that had a temporary injunction against it yesterday.

I noticed this from August 19. Apparently Sid Miller and Dan Patrick tried to join the lawsuit as friends-of-the-court and Judge Sparks told them NO.

In a tersely worded order, the no-nonsense federal judge on Aug. 9 denied a request by authors of the law – Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, and Rep. Sid Miller, R-Stephenville – which requires a woman to undergo an ultrasound before terminating a pregnancy and also requires her, except in rare circumstances, to be subjected to a detailed description of fetal development. On Aug. 12, Sparks issued a second order, denying a similar request filed by members of the Legislature who supported the Miller/Patrick law. According to the lawmakers' brief, they are "constitutional officers who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States in discharging their official duties, including enacting state legislation." As such, they "desire to participate" in the ongoing lawsuit in order to "explain how [House Bill] 15 responds to the evolving needs of Texas women facing an abortion decision," the brief states.

Requiring an ultrasound and description of fetal development, they wrote, is not "an ideological message." Still, they noted, the law does acknowledge "that abortion is an irrevocable procedure: it may have lasting, negative effects on the woman; and, yes, abortion does stop a beating heart." This is the same approach Miller and Patrick took in their attempt to influence the case: "An abortion performed without a medical professional's full disclosure to a pregnant woman of the impact on the fetus and the potential health consequences of an abortion could undermine the woman's trust in medical professionals," they argued.

Presumably, it was gratuitous language such as that which prompted Sparks' tersely worded denial of the request. The parties in the case – the Center for Reproductive Rights for the plaintiff doctors who are seeking to have the law enjoined, and the state in defense of the law – are "well represented," Sparks wrote, and not in need of help from either Patrick or Miller, "particularly when much of their 'assistance' is nothing more than thinly-veiled rhetoric."

"This is a federal lawsuit about the constitutionality of a statute, not a soapbox for politicians or a sounding board for public opinion," he continued. "The Court is confident counsel in this case can protect their clients' interests all by themselves."

As a reminder, in case you need a laugh, here's what Sid Miller said before, that the law was needed because women were not allowed to view sonograms. heh.


Permalink Tags:          
     Views: 7351 
Latest Blog Post by salon -Tourist Problems Around Fossil Rim on CR 2008 (Glen Rose)
More Posts You Might Enjoy
Rick Perry told by American Meteorological Society that he fundamentally doesn't understand climate change
Sid Miller Fined by Texas Ethics Commission
Sid Miller Having a Bad Day about Feral Hogs- Kaput Company Pulls Out (April 25 2017)
Texas Hog Hunters File Actions Against Sid Miller for his Warfarin (Rat Poison) Hog Apocalypse

 You! Leave a Comment! You Know you Want To!
You must be a registered member to comment on the blog.
Your first post is held pending approval to make sure you're not a spammer bot

 Not registered? Or you can login!

LOGON - Name:Password:

New poster comments are moderated, meaning they won't show up until approved... or not.  Be patient-we have lives outside this blog, so it might take awhile You want to be rude? totally stupid? inappropriate? Racist? Bigoted? Flame war baiter? Your post may be deleted. Spammers or people posting pretend interest comments but really wanting to hawk their latest book or sell stuff or govt propaganda flacks won't see their posts published. Comments do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the site owner(salon).
If you have a problem with logging in or registering, please speak up right away. Love your comments. Oh, except spammers
More on commenting



Click Here for Main Page

Latest Posts

Tourist Problems Around Fossil Rim on CR 2008 (Glen Rose)
salon 6/25/2017

Ruminations of the Easily Amused for 6/25/2017
salon 6/25/2017

Ruminations of the Easily Amused for 6/24/2017
salon 6/24/2017

5th Republican Senator Comes Out Against Trumpcare Senate Bill (6/24/2017)
salon 6/24/2017

2017- Invocations at Glen Rose ISD School Board Meetings
salon 6/24/2017

Hilariously Astonishing- Definitive list of Donald Trump Lies
salon 6/24/2017




Comments

salon > Update on letter grading from Texas Lege May 2017 In the compromise version of the bill, schools and districts would be graded in three categories: student achievement, student progress and closi.... (Letter Grades in 2017 for Glen Rose ISD and Brazos River Charter Schools)

salon > 4/3/2017-Update on the American Humanist Assoc vs Birdville ISD case. In March 2017 - A federal appeals court on Monday said a Texas school board may open its meetings with student-led prayers with.... (Religious News and Notes from the Distaff Side - 5/14/2016)

salon > Incidentally, nobody ran against Hankins, so sad to say there will be election this year.  (Updated for 2017Why I Will Not Vote for Ron Hankins, if he runs, to be on the Somervell County Hospital Board (prev 2015))

salon > Adding a great article from Texas Tribune "In courthouse turf war, Texas counties rally against statewide court records portal". The Texas Supreme Court, through its Office of Court Adm.... (Regarding Re:SearchTX and Somervell County (Glen Rose))













Home | Blog Home | About | News | Piazza | Calendar | Audio/Video/Open Rec | Search
Write!  |profile | quotes |
top Daily | top Weekly |top Month | top Year | Top All! | archives | subscribe RSS