Appeals court reinstates Heartbeat Act

An appeals court has reinstated the Heartbeat Act after a Federal judge blocked it.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to a request from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton against the injunction.

The bill was labelled as an “offensive deprivation” of women’s constitutional rights by Federal Judge Robert Pitman on Wednesday.

The Heartbeat Act bans abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected inside the womb.

It also gives individuals the right to sue those involved in the abortions of a beating heart.

The bill has faced criticism from Far-Left activists, the Democrats, and Hollywood. Pro-choice activists have held protests against it and are ready to hold them once again.

The Biden Administration vowed to use everything in its power to delay or repeal the law.

In order to prevent it from being enforced, it asked the courts to block the law until its legality was being challenged.

Texas officials promised to appeal against the ruling which has now been thrown out temporarily.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has asked the Justice Department to respond to the ruling by Tuesday.

Texas Attorney General Paxton called the decision “great news” and vowed to keep Texas free from “federal overreach.”

Pro-choice activists however, have urged the Supreme court to step in and stop the discriminatory obstacles in healthcare.

Texas’ law was passed by elected representatives, those challenging its legality will eventually take it to the Supreme court.

Anticipating the worst-case scenario, the media has been busy launching premeditated attacks on the Supreme Court.

The decision against an injunction was severely criticized, and many even tried to malign the impartiality of the judges. Accusing their decisions to be influenced by their personal beliefs.

The media and some “activists” love to label the Judges as “liberal” or “conservative.”

This is applies only in their personal lives and in no way can impact their decisions. They know it all too well what would happen if their decisions are influenced or go against the Constitution or what the Framers intended. To even suspect bias without evidence is unfair.

The Judges shouldn’t be expected to rule in one side’s favor because that side is vocal and gets media attention. They will be impartial and rule what the Constitution and/or the Framers established.

Precedent plays an important part, but with time the precedent can change or evolve. There have been numerous cases where the precedent was not followed and a new one was set.

We don’t know what the fate of the Heartbeat Act or Roe v. Wade will be, but we do know that the media will launch an attack on the Supreme Court if it decides against the precedent set by Roe v. Wade.

God Bless America.