The Biden administration denounces the barbarity of the Texas abortion law that would force a 12-year-old boy to have his son raped

One week after Supreme Court Conservatives gave the green light to a monstrous Texas law banning abortion at six weeks without rape or incest exceptions, and two days after the Texas governor Greg Abbott boldly stated that the “Texas Heartbeat Act” is not as vile as it seems because people are actually given two weeks of luxury approximately after getting pregnant to decide what to do, the Biden administration has sued the Lone Star state, saying the law is unconstitutional and sets an absolutely horrible precedent.

Announcing the lawsuit at a press conference in Washington, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the “unprecedented” design of the law, in which Texas has delegated citizen vigilantes to enforce it by putting a reward of more than $ 10,000 on the head of anyone suspected of aiding or abetting the medical procedure, is intended. ” to prevent women from exercising their constitutional rights by frustrating judicial control for as long as possible … The act is clearly unconstitutional according to the long-standing precedent of the Supreme Court. “

As many have pointed out, this was on purpose. The evil minds who came to the law did so specifically with the intention of making it difficult or impossible for clinics to obtain court orders that would block law enforcement; since the law went into effect last week, Texas abortion providers have stopped offering the procedure and some have been forced to close completely. “This kind of scheme to repeal the U.S. Constitution is an issue that all Americans, regardless of their policy or party, should fear,” Garland warned Thursday, saying the approach of Texas could become a model for other states, at least seven of which are already planning imitative legislation, when it comes to not just abortion, but other constitutional rights.

“The United States has the authority and responsibility to ensure that Texas cannot evade its obligations under the Constitution and deprive individuals of their constitutional rights by adopting a legal scheme designed specifically to circumvent traditional federal judicial review mechanisms,” he says. the demand. The Justice Department is seeking a declaratory ruling to declare the abortion ban void, as well as a “preliminary and permanent measure against the State of Texas, including all of its officers, employees and agents, including private parties, “which would enforce the ban, CNN notes.

According to CNN, the Supreme Court’s refusal to prevent the law from coming into force last week surprised the DOJ, even though it is full of conservatives with disturbing opinions about a woman’s right to vote (which is exactly the reason for which they were nominated). in court). But given the fact that similar laws had previously been blocked in other states, Justice Department officials apparently did not expect judges to allow this to happen. For CNN:

Dozens of lawyers spent last week working on the best way to try to challenge the law directly. They decided to use federal programs that would be disrupted by the ban that presented the best way to consolidate and try to prevent the law. On Thursday, Garland said Texas law violated the activities of the Department of Labor, the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. Specifically, the DOJ said in the lawsuit, Texas law “exposes federal personnel and dealers to responsibilities for fulfilling their federal obligations to provide access to abortion-related services to individuals” by the federal government. .

The DOJ also argued in the file that the government has the right to file a lawsuit against the state because the U.S. can “claim its interest” when a state law “flagrantly violates the constitutional rights of the general public.” Therefore, “the United States may sue a state to claim the rights of individuals when a state violates the rights protected by the Constitution.” He also cited the so-called clause of the Constitution, “Attention”, which says that the president has a duty to “ensure that the laws are executed faithfully.”

Credit –