Myron H. Thompson | |
---|---|
Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama | |
Assumed office August 22, 2013 | |
Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama | |
In office 1991–1998 | |
Preceded by | Truman McGill Hobbs |
Succeeded by | Harold Albritton |
Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama | |
In office September 29,1980 –August 22,2013 | |
Appointed by | Jimmy Carter |
Preceded by | Frank Minis Johnson |
Succeeded by | Emily C. Marks |
Personal details | |
Born | Myron Herbert Thompson January 7,1947 Tuskegee,Alabama |
Education | Yale University (BA,JD) |
Myron Herbert Thompson (born January 7,1947) is a senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama.
Born in Tuskegee,Alabama,Thompson received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Yale University in 1969 and a Juris Doctor from Yale Law School in 1972. He was an Assistant Attorney General of Alabama from 1972 to 1974,and then in private practice in Dothan,Alabama until 1980.
On September 17,1980,Thompson was nominated by President Jimmy Carter to a seat on the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama vacated by Judge Frank Minis Johnson. Thompson was confirmed by the United States Senate on September 26,1980,and received his commission on September 29,1980. He served as Chief Judge from 1991 to 1998. He took senior status on August 22,2013. [1] As of 2020,he is the last Democratic appointee to serve on the District Court for the Middle District of Alabama,and also the last judge appointed by a Democratic president to that court.
In 2013,in a redistricting case heard by a three-judge panel,Thompson disagreed with its decision contending it was an illegal use of racial quotas. He wrote that Alabama's use of the Voting Rights Act was a "cruel irony," that as the state was simultaneously arguing before the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder ,that Section 5 should be found unconstitutional,it was "relying on racial quotas…and seeking to justify those quotas with the very provision it was helping to render inert." [2] On October 29,2019,Judge Thompson issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Human Life Protection Act from taking effect in Alabama as prescribed on November 15,2019. The Alabama law "imposes criminal liability on abortion providers for nearly all abortions,completed or attempted,regardless of fetal viability." In essence," the Court said,"the Act imposes a near-total ban on abortion." Judge Thompson concluded,"The court is persuaded that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in showing that the Act violates an individual’s constitutional right to obtain a pre-viability abortion,and thus that it violates her constitutional rights." [3] In 2014,in Planned Parenthood Southeast,Inc.,v. Strange, (also known as Planned Parenthood Southeast,Inc.,v. Bentley ),Thompson ruled an Alabama law regulating abortion unconstitutional,citing the undue burden standard. [4] [5]
Roe v. Wade,410 U.S. 113 (1973),was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States generally protected a right to have an abortion. The decision struck down many abortion laws,and caused an ongoing abortion debate in the United States about whether,or to what extent,abortion should be legal,who should decide the legality of abortion,and what the role of moral and religious views in the political sphere should be. The decision also shaped debate concerning which methods the Supreme Court should use in constitutional adjudication.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey,505 U.S. 833 (1992),was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court upheld the right to have an abortion as established by the "essential holding" of Roe v. Wade (1973) and issued as its "key judgment" the restoration of the undue burden standard when evaluating state-imposed restrictions on that right. Both the essential holding of Roe and the key judgment of Casey were overturned by the Supreme Court in 2022,with its landmark decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
Frank Minis Johnson Jr. was a United States district judge and United States circuit judge serving 1955 to 1999 on the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama,United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. He made landmark civil rights rulings that helped end segregation and disenfranchisement of African Americans in the South. In the words of journalist and historian Bill Moyers,Judge Johnson "altered forever the face of the South."
Gonzales v. Carhart,550 U.S. 124 (2007),was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. The case reached the high court after U.S. Attorney General,Alberto Gonzales,appealed a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in favor of LeRoy Carhart that struck down the Act. Also before the Supreme Court was the consolidated appeal of Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,whose ruling had the same effect as that of the Eighth Circuit.
Chester John Straub is an inactive senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit headquartered in New York City.
The undue burden standard is a constitutional test fashioned by the Supreme Court of the United States. The test,first developed in the late 20th century,is widely used in American constitutional law. In short,the undue burden standard states that a legislature cannot make a particular law that is too burdensome or restrictive of one's fundamental rights.
This is a timeline of reproductive rights legislation,a chronological list of laws and legal decisions affecting human reproductive rights. Reproductive rights are a sub-set of human rights pertaining to issues of reproduction and reproductive health. These rights may include some or all of the following:the right to legal or safe abortion,the right to birth control,the right to access quality reproductive healthcare,and the right to education and access in order to make reproductive choices free from coercion,discrimination,and violence. Reproductive rights may also include the right to receive education about contraception and sexually transmitted infections,and freedom from coerced sterilization,abortion,and contraception,and protection from practices such as female genital mutilation (FGM).
Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth,428 U.S. 52 (1976),is a United States Supreme Court case on abortion. The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of a Missouri statute regulating abortion. The Court upheld the right to have an abortion,declaring unconstitutional the statute's requirement of prior written consent from a parent or a spouse.
Earl Leroy Yeakel III,also known as Lee Yeakel,is a former United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.
The legality of abortion in the United States and the various restrictions imposed on the procedure vary significantly depending on the laws of each state or other jurisdiction. Some states prohibit abortion at all stages of pregnancy with few exceptions,others permit it up to a certain point in a woman's pregnancy,while others allow abortion throughout a woman's pregnancy. In states where abortion is legal,several classes of restrictions on the procedure may exist,such as parental consent or notification laws,requirements that patients be shown an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion,mandatory waiting periods,and counselling requirements.
Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt,579 U.S. 582 (2016),was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court announced on June 27,2016. The Court ruled 5–3 that Texas cannot place restrictions on the delivery of abortion services that create an undue burden for women seeking an abortion. On June 28,2016,the Supreme Court refused to hear challenges from Wisconsin and Mississippi where federal appeals courts had struck down similar laws. Other states with similar laws may also be impacted.
The Human Life Protection Act,also known as House Bill 314 and the Alabama abortion ban,is an Alabama statute enacted on May 15,2019,that imposes a near-total ban on abortion in the state. Set to go into effect in November 2019,a legal challenge against the bill delayed implementation until 2022. The bill was passed in both chambers of the Alabama Legislature in a party-line vote and signed by Republican governor Kay Ivey. Under the Human Life Protection Act,a doctor who performs a banned abortion in the state of Alabama is guilty of a Class A felony,and could be sentenced to life imprisonment. Several proposed amendments that would have allowed abortions in cases of rape and incest were rejected.
Abortion in Alabama is illegal. Under section 26-23H-4 of the Code of Alabama in the U.S. state of Alabama,it is unlawful for an abortion to be performed unless it is deemed absolutely necessary in order to prevent a serious health risk to the pregnant woman. There are no exceptions for rape or incest.
Abortion in Wisconsin has been legal since September 18,2023,and is performed in Madison and Milwaukee,through 22 weeks gestation. However,elective abortions in Wisconsin are under dispute after the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 24,2022. Abortion opponents cite an 1849 law that they claim bans the procedure in all cases except when the life of the mother is in danger. However,lower level courts have argued that the law only applies to infanticide and not consensual abortions. The enforceability of the law is disputed and being considered by the state courts. Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin announced that they would resume abortion services in Madison and Milwaukee on September 18,2023.
Abortion in Iowa is legal up to 20 weeks of gestation. A 6-week abortion ban has been indefinitely blocked in court.
Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky,Inc.,No. 18-483,587 U.S. ___,139 S.Ct. 1780 (2019),was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the constitutionality of a 2016 anti-abortion law passed in the state of Indiana. Indiana's law sought to ban abortions performed solely on the basis of the fetus' gender,race,ethnicity,or disabilities. Lower courts had blocked enforcement of the law for violating a woman's right to abortion under privacy concerns within the Fourteenth Amendment,as previously found in the landmark cases Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The lower courts also blocked enforcement of another portion of the law that required the disposal of aborted fetuses through burial or cremation. The per curiam decision by the Supreme Court overturned the injunction on the fetal disposal portion of the law,but otherwise did not challenge or confirm the lower courts' ruling on the non-discrimination clauses,leaving these in place.
Planned Parenthood v. Rounds,686 F.3d 889,is an Eighth Circuit decision addressing the constitutionality of a South Dakota law which forced doctors to make certain disclosures to patients seeking abortions. The challenged statute required physicians to convey to their abortion-seeking patients a number of state-mandated disclosures,including a statement that abortions caused an "[i]ncreased risk of suicide ideation and suicide." Planned Parenthood of Minnesota,North Dakota,South Dakota,along with its medical director Dr. Carol E. Ball,challenged the South Dakota law,arguing that it violated patients' and physicians' First Amendment free speech rights and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. After several appeals and remands,the Eighth Circuit,sitting en banc,upheld the South Dakota law,holding that the mandated suicide advisement was not "unconstitutionally misleading or irrelevant," and did "not impose an unconstitutional burden on women seeking abortions or their physicians." This supplemented the Eighth Circuit's earlier rulings in this case,where the court determined that the state was allowed to impose a restrictive emergency exception on abortion procedures and to force physicians to convey disclosures regarding the woman's relationship to the fetus and the humanity of the fetus.
Amid the COVID-19 pandemic,anti-abortion government officials in several American states enacted or attempted to enact restrictions on abortion,characterizing it as a non-essential procedure that can be suspended during the medical emergency. The orders have led to several legal challenges and criticism by abortion-rights groups and several national medical organizations,including the American Medical Association. Legal challenges on behalf of abortion providers,many of which are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood,have successfully stopped some of the orders on a temporary basis,though bans in several states have not been challenged.
Julie Rikelman is a Ukrainian-born American lawyer who is serving as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. She represented the Mississippi abortion clinic in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization,the U.S. Supreme Court case that overturned the constitutional right to abortion.