Wiretap: Supreme Court weighs landmark Texas abortion case

Wiretap: Supreme Court weighs landmark Texas abortion case
Anti-abortion and reproductive-rights activists gathered outside the Supreme Court as justices heard a case that would determine whether Texas could whittle away at abortion rights.

Court trouble

Dana Milbank: As the Supreme Court hears a major case on abortion rights, hundreds of uteruses gather outside. Did the Senate Republicans birth the court a new round of trouble? Via The Washington Post.

What if?

The Texas abortion case asks one question that must be answered: What happens if the clinics close? Via The Atlantic.

Taking applications

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is vetting possible Supreme Court nominees. One is Judge Jane Kelly, a federal appellate judge in Iowa, who was praised by Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley and confirmed unanimously. Via The New York Times.

Hitting consumers

The head of the Democratic Party is trying to weaken Elizabeth Warren’s consumer protection agency. Read it again. It still comes out the same way. Via Vox.

Building cases

Former State Department staffer gets immunity from the Justice Department in the Clinton email investigation. Is that as bad as it sounds for Hillary? Via The Washington Post.

I’m back

As at least 47 percent of Americans wonder why, Mitt Romney is giving what his aides call a major speech on the state of the presidential race (or why no one should vote for Donald Trump). Via Politico.

Wrong move?

Megan McArdle: Trump voters need to ask themselves whether voting for Trump in the primary season is the same as voting for Clinton in November? Via Bloomberg.

Contested convention

The only way to stop Trump now would be a contested convention. Via The National Review.

Too white

If Super Tuesday proved anything, it’s that Bernie’s revolution is too white to win. Via The New Republic.


Photo credit: F-Collective: Pro-Choice Action, Creative Commons, Flickr

Get Wiretap delivered to your inbox every weekday!
Just enter your email address below.

Like this story? Steal it! Feel free to republish it in part or in full, just please give credit to The Colorado Independent and add a link to the original.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

About the Author

Staff Report

1 Comment

  1. Gabriel King on said:

    Yeah like stopping people from murdering children is SUCH a horrible thing !

    And of course the Supreme Court ruled “We have to assume the baby is not living, and you have to prove it’s alive…”

    Instead of “We will assume the baby is living, and you have to prove it is not before you murder them.”

Leave a Response

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>