Politics
Interim AL Senator Doug Jones Condemned By Alabama Senate For Supporting Late-Term Abortion
Abortion is NOT a popular thing in Alabama.
Alabama’s interim Senator Doug Jones has been officially condemned by the Alabama State Senate because of his support for late-term abortion. The resolution condemning him comes in response to Jones voting against the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which would have prohibited abortion after the 20th week of a pregnancy.
Republican State Sen. Bill Hightower,who sponsored the measure, explained the reasoning in a public statement:
“Senator Jones owes the people of Alabama an explanation for turning his back on a campaign promise he made just a few short months ago,” Hightower’s statement read. “More importantly, Senator Jones needs to explain why he would turn his back on the basic humanity of an individual’s right to life. At 20 weeks in the womb, it is not about a choice, it is about an innocent little baby’s right to live.”
Hightower went on to explain that the science is clear, “at 20 weeks of pregnancy, a child has a heartbeat, a child feels pain.”
During his campaign for U.S. Senate, Jones had stated he was mostly opposed to late term abortion, stating “the law for decades has been that late-term procedures are generally restricted except in the case of medical necessity. That’s what I support.”
His vote in opposition to a ban on late term abortion in the U.S. Senate clearly shows he has fallen back on his word. That was one of the main points made in the condemnation resolution.
Doug Jones was elected as the interim Senator for Alabama to fill the vacancy left by Jeff Sessions when he joined the Trump Administration as Attorney General. Jones was considered a long-shot candidate prior to the Republican candidate, Judge Roy Moore being smacked with accusations of child sexual assault. Jones had virtually zero chance at winning before the accusations were dropped on Moore.
Judge Moore has strongly denied those claims made against him, and has recently filed a lawsuit against his accusers in order to clear his name.
Politics
Judge Amy Coney Barrett Recently Approved Democrat COVID-19 Lockdown Policies
Her decision should raise some eyebrows.
Judge Amy Coney Barrett has emerged as the choice of Conservative Twitter to be the successor on the Supreme Court to replace deceased former justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Friday after many bouts of cancer.
However, Barrett’s record is troubling on many issues, with a ruling that gives Democrats in Illinois blanket authority to shut down society based on COVID-19 mass hysteria standing out as particularly heinous.
Barrett concurred with the majority in Illinois Republican Party et al. v. J.B. Pritzker, Governor of Illinois to keep the illegal lockdown in place and allow Democrats to rip up the Constitution under the guise of safety. She hid behind the precedent of Jacobsen v. Massachusetts (1905) in an attempt to avoid culpability for her decision.
“At least at this stage of the pandemic, Jacobson takes off the table any general challenge to [Pritzker’s executive order] based on the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection of liberty,” the majority opinion read in the case.
It continued: “[W]hile in the face of a pandemic the Governor of Illinois was not compelled to make a special dispensation for religious activities, see Elim, nothing in the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment barred him from doing so. As in the cases reconciling the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, all that the Governor did was to limit to a certain degree the burden on religious exercise that [the governor’s executive order] imposed.”
While Barrett rolls over to the far left and allows Democrats to rip up the Constitution, other judges are actually living up to their oath, such as the Trump-appointed District Judge in Pennsylvania, William S. Stickman.
In his ruling, Stickman refused to hide behind precedent to allow the constitution to be destroyed by Democrats. He effectively deep-sixed Pennsylvania’s lockdown and obliterated the abominable Jacobson decision.
He wrote: “Jacobson was decided over a century ago. Since that time, there has been substantial development of federal constitutional law in the area of civil liberties… That century of development has seen the creation of tiered levels of scrutiny for constitutional claims. They did not exist when Jacobson was decided. […]”
“The Court shares the concerns expressed by Justice Alito… and believes that an extraordinarily deferential standard based on Jacobson is not appropriate,” Stickman added.
Patriotic attorney Robert Barnes has levied additional criticism against Barrett for her unwillingness to stand up to Democrat overreach.
“For example, Barrett, I would oppose her nomination personally. So I would do whatever I can to see her nomination fail. I have no interest in seeing someone like that on the bench,” Barnes explained during an interview on the Viva Frei YouTube channel.
“She comes from the old money corporate South, a world I’m familiar with and the kind of people I’d never want to see in positions of power… That’s the world she comes from. Her dad was a big Shell oil corporate lawyer,” he continued.
Barnes explained how Barrett’s history working as a Clerk for deceased former Justice Antonin Scalia is giving the false impression that she shares his staunch originalist beliefs when that is not in fact the case. He explained that her rise is similar to that of Chief Justice John Roberts, whose record of extreme cowardice on the bench has harmed the nation immeasurably.
“This is how Justice Roberts got on the bench. You do two things if you’re on the Republican side of the aisle: You let people know that you believe Roe v. Wade should be overturned even if you don’t believe that… And you play the corporate side of the equation,” he said.
“But most importantly, you get that Justice and his extended intellectual heavyweights to lobby for you to be appointed to the judicial bench down the road… That’s why people are pushing Barrett,” Barnes added.
Barnes highlighted some of Barrett’s worst decisions in a blistering Twitter thread.
#Barrett exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps. Read: https://t.co/bDIxcymXxq
— Robert Barnes (@Barnes_Law) September 22, 2020
Another example: a highly dubious stop that the media can easily make into #Barrett justifying stopping drivers for "driving while black" that she prevented from reaching a jury trial despite the cops sudden memory loss in the case. https://t.co/KlHbPajnhg
— Robert Barnes (@Barnes_Law) September 22, 2020
#Barrett justified discriminating against someone participating in protests over the killing of his brother, in a case that will make easy headlines for her critics to make her look the misconduct-excuser her actual record says she is. https://t.co/Az9ulkWSMv
— Robert Barnes (@Barnes_Law) September 22, 2020
-
Tech4 days agoMeet the Alternative to the Drudge Report
-
Violent Left3 days agoBLM Activist Wearing “Justice for Breonna Taylor” T-Shirt Shoots, Kills Three People in Bar Owned by Louisville Ex-Cop
-
Campaign 20203 days agoSLEEPY: Joe Biden Campaign Team Pulls Joe from Daily Activities at 8:35AM, Months Before Election
-
Congress4 days agoFLASHBACK: Three Recent Supreme Court Justices Were Confirmed Within 45 Days
-
Deplorables2 days agoNebraska Small Business Owner Commits Suicide After Being Railroaded With Manslaughter For Defending His Bar From Criminal Rioters
-
Videos2 days agoSPOOKY: Video Footage Appears to Capture ‘Ghosts’ Running Across Gettysburg Battlefield
-
Violent Left1 day agoBezos-Linked Thinktank Official Calls for Michael Anton’s Execution for Exposing Anti-Trump Color Revolution
-
Campaign 20203 days agoWATCH: Joe Biden Waves to Absolutely No One As He Disembarks Private Plane in Florida
