Definition Of Civil Liberties

ACLU Says Arizona Is Blowing Smoke With Lawsuit on Medical Marijuana Law

     PHOENIX (CN) - The ACLU asked a federal judge to dismiss Gov. Jan Brewer's lawsuit seeking declaratory judgment on whether the state's voter-approved Medical Marijuana Act is pre-empted by federal law and should be struck down.
     The ACLU claims Arizona's lawsuit should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or failure to state a claim because "state officials cannot use the federal courts as a vehicle either to validate, or to attack, their own laws."
     The ACLU also claims Brewer's lawsuit "is unripe" since "no state official faces a genuine threat of prosecution."
     And the ACLU claims that while "state law cannot immunize federal criminal conduct," neither can "the nullification of Arizona's law on the basis of federal pre-emption be legally correct."
     Voters approved Proposition 203, the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act, in November 2010, allowing people with chronic medical conditions to use doctor-prescribed medical marijuana.
     Brewer sued the federal government after the U.S. Attorney for Arizona, Dennis Burke, wrote to Arizona Department of Health Services Director Will Humble that "growing, distribution, and possession of marijuana 'in any capacity, other than as part of a federally authorized research program, is a violation of federal law regardless of state laws that purport to legalize such activities.'"
     ACLU staff attorney Scott Michelman said in a statement: "On the pretext of protecting her state employees, Gov. Brewer is simply seeking to thwart the will of Arizona's voters and unconscionably block sick people from accessing their vital medicine. People should have the freedom to choose the medicine their doctors believe will be most effective for them."
     The ACLU claims Brewer has manufactured the dispute: "Tellingly, the state avers [in its lawsuit] that "(a) controversy has arisen and now exists between plaintiffs and defendants and, indeed among defendants, relating to their rights and duties." Compl. ¶ 169 (emphasis added). Having named two sets of John Doe parties defined by their opposing interests - as defined by the state, Does I-X support the AMMA, and Does XI-XX oppose it, see Compl. ¶¶ 167-68 - the state can make the logical (if circular) claim that a conflict exists 'among Defendants.' But that is not the test of a case or controversy: a dispute must exist between defendants and Fed. Election Comm'n v.

Weasel Zippers » Blog Archive » ACLU Joins Forces With Planned ...

(PoliticsPA) — Civil liberties and abortion rights advocates are criticizing a bill introduced by State Rep. Matt Baker (R-Tioga) that increases rules for abortion clinics. They argue that the measure is a thinly veiled attempt at restricting abortions, saying a similar bill in Texas forced 18 of 20 clinics to close.

Proponents of the legislation and pro-life activists argue that HB 574 is necessary to close gaps in abortion regulation, brought to light in the now infamous case of abortion provider Dr. Kermit Gosnell. Baker’s would require freestanding abortion clinics to follow the same standards as ambulatory surgical facilities, including increasing the size of procedure rooms and mandating the presence a full time RN during procedures.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania issued a press release, and took the time to post a video campaign to raise awareness about the legislation via Facebook.

“It is absolutely clear that House Bill 574 is an attempt to put providers out of business. It is not about patient safety,” said Andy Hoover, legislative director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania.

It “would effectively close most and maybe all of the independent abortion clinics in Pennsylvania. The requirements of this House bill will cost abortion providers hundreds of thousands of dollars in building renovations and staff increases. If HB 574 becomes law,” Hoover added, “women will still seek abortion care, but with reputable clinics closed, the chances increase that women will seek abortions from doctors like Gosnell.”

Sari Stevens, Executive Director of Planned Parenthood PA Advocates expressed her strong discontent with HB 574 in the interview with Hoover from ACLU-PA.

“Texas in particular had a similar bill pass, and 18 of the 20 providers immediately went out of business and never returned to practice,” said Stevens.

When murdering unborn children become an American civil liberty, then we know that the soul of America has been usurped, that Democrats found another way to oppress the Blacks, that the Abortion lobby has deep pockets able to buy accomplices in the highest political places and that this is the era will women are no longer punished with children. (Then again, that may be the plan – no more American children so we can import Muslim families to take over.)

The entire issue of abortion is based on religious nonsense. The whole idea that the fetus is a ‘human’ life in any sense other than a biological one, is a concept which debatable by people of reason–unless you happen to believe the soul is inserted by God at concept, and that makes it whole human. Thankfully, most people don’t believe that is an adequate criterion to call abortion murder.

Civil liberties in America, a reference handbook

Institutes of natural law, being the substance of a course of lectures on Grotius De jure belli et pacis, read in St. John's College, Cambridge

Liberty, equality, and justice, civil rights, women's rights, and the regulation of business, 1865-1932

Political writings

Human rights and civil liberties