Arkansas’ Abortion Ban Over-Turned by Tyrannical Judge

[Lifesite News] A federal judge continued to block three pro-life laws in Arkansas from going into effect because they are “unconstitutional” and would cause “irreparable harm” for women seeking abortions.

Judge Kristine Baker of the Eastern District of Arkansas ruled again against an 18-week abortion ban, another law banning abortion based upon a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome, and a third law requiring abortionists to have OB/GYN certifications. The 18-week abortion law bans abortion except in cases of rape, incest, and medical emergency.

Baker said in her ruling that the three laws “cause ongoing and imminent irreparable harm to the plaintiffs and their patients,” and “the harms to women who are unable to obtain abortion care as a result of (the acts) are irreparable.”

The Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Planned Parenthood had sued Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge and other state officials in June, arguing that the three measures are unconstitutional.

Baker addressed the 18-week ban in particular in her decision, suggesting she would ultimately rule in favor of the pro-abortion plaintiffs based upon the reasoning that the ban is unconstitutional, CNN reported.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1973 in Roe v. Wade that the Constitution had an implicit right to privacy that included the right for women to obtain an abortion, states could put greater restrictions on abortion after an unborn baby reached viability.

Roe v. Wade defined viability at 28 weeks. However, in 1992’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey, this was revised to 24 weeks, given trends in science since Roe had meant later and greater chance of survival for children who are born pre-term.

The standard for viability has continued to trend earlier than 24 weeks since then, and more babies are surviving pre-term birth when given adequate medical attention.

“The Court concludes that, at this stage of the proceedings and on the record evidence currently before the Court, plaintiffs are likely to prevail on their argument that (the ban) unconstitutionally restricts pre-viability abortions and, therefore, is facially unconstitutional,” Baker wrote in her decision.

To continue reading, click here.

[Editor’s Note: This article was written by Lisa Bourne (headline changed by P&P) and first published at LifeSite News]


Bringing you discernment news and commentary from a biblical, polemical perspective means it is tough out there on social media. We’re constantly getting kneecapped and constrained by tech companies who find our fidelity to the scripture and pursuit of truth to be intolerable, resulting in our reach being severely throttled.

For this reason, we ask you please consider supporting us a few different ways. The first, by liking and following our new Facebook page, our home where we share new posts and interact with our members. The second, by following and retweeting our Twitter page. The third, by signing up for our newsletter below.

And last, through direct support. You can catch our free weekly episodes of the Polemics Report by subscribing at BTWN. If you like what you hear and desire to hear more, you can get the VIP full-length version for only $5.95 per month on Patreon. Also, you get other freebies for additional monthly pledges.

Subscribe to us on Patreon here and support our ministry.

God bless!

Stay informed. Subscribe Today.

When you subscribe, please add to your contacts to ensure that your newsletter doesn’t go into your spam folder.

Enter your email address below…

Contact Us Donate

Facebook Comments
Ads Blocker Image Powered by Code Help Pro
Ad Blocker Detected!!!

We have detected that you are using extensions to block ads. If you would like to go ad-free, please purchase a full subscription on Substack.