Republicans wrong about Constitutionality of Abortion Restrictions...who knew?

Those high and mighty constitutional conservatives, like Scott Walker, knew they were passing unconstitutional restrictions on abortion providers according to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down 5-3, restrictions on Texas abortion clinics and doctors … signaled that it would soon do the same in Wisconsin.

Walker's loyal lapdog and legal stooge AG Brad Schimel, who never saw a Republicans law that wasn't constitutional, is now waiting for the Wisconsin law shoe to drop, but....

Two federal courts have declared the law unconstitutional.

Justice Stephen Breyer directly cited the lawsuit over Wisconsin's law:

"We agree with the District Court that the surgical center requirement, like the admitting-privileges requirement, provides few, if any, health benefits for women, poses a substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions, and constitutes an 'undue burden' on their constitutional right to do so. When directly asked at oral argument whether Texas knew of a single instance in which the new requirement would have helped even one woman obtain better treatment, Texas admitted that there was no evidence in the record of such a case. This answer is consistent with the findings of the other federal district courts that have considered the health benefits of other states' similar admitting-privileges laws."

Schimel is so politically invested in Walker’s agenda, he actually claimed the Republican legislature was virtually infallible:

"Today's U.S. Supreme Court ruling on a Texas abortion law is disappointing and undermines the respect due to policy-makers.”

We should respect our policy makers…and ignore the judicial ramblings of Reagan appointee judge Richard Posner on the Wisconsin law:

Writing for the 7th Circuit majority, Judge Richard Posner added that the law was obviously designed to close down abortion clinics, had nothing to do with women’s health and was a “clear flouting of Roe vs. Wade” … "The legislature's intention to impose the two-day deadline ... is difficult to explain save as a method of preventing abortions that women have a constitutional right to obtain." 

And like Schimel, Wisconsin Family Action's Julaine Appling knows Republican lawmakers are the moral watchdogs of right wing socialism:

Appling (said) Judge Posner got it wrong. "I think it’s impertinent on his part to believe he knows the minds and motives of the people that are representing the majority of the people here in our state. The Republicans that passed that law had a solid majority, there was unanimity amongst them, to put that type of protective measure in there for women, and I think it’s wrong for the judges to presume they know better than the people and those that we elect to represent us as to why we’re doing what we’re doing."

The Texas law did have its supporters on the court. In a twisted piece of right wing logic, Justice Alito spewed this:

"When we decide cases on particularly controversial issues, we should take special care to apply settled procedural rules in a neutral manner," Alito wrote in his dissent. "The Court has not done that here."

Yea, that Texas law was a fine piece of neutrality. Crazy zealot Justice Thomas joined in the lunacy:

Thomas wrote that the decision "exemplifies the court's troubling tendency `to bend the rules when any effort to limit abortion, or even to speak in opposition to abortion, is at issue."'

Thomas actually said "any effort to limit abortion." Did he just admit the activists real intentions were okay with him?