Halter vs. Southeast

[Bacon King]

Greetings Honorable Justices

My client Dr. Denis P Halter located out of New Castle Delaware was fined for issuing three illegal abortions and has had his license since revoked. All three abortions took place at 15, 18, and 19 weeks.

Dr Halter alleges the act that he was disciplined under directly violates Section 5 of the Atlasia constitution. Specifically along the lines of a persons right to liberty. Halter alleges that by restricting abortion at 14 weeks a persons right to liberty is violated. Halter also alleges the act in question violates the previous precedent set in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Both cases held that abortion can not be restricted up to the point of fetal viability. Halter alleges that fetal viability is around 24 weeks; thus this act violates past precedent.

Halter is asking for the court to rule the South Aborting act as unconstitutional and reverse all fines Halter has had to pay plus reinstate his license.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanks
BK

[tmthforu94]

This has been seen.

[windjammer]

Writ of Certiorari

The Supreme Court of Atlasia grants certiorari to hear the question of whether the South Aborting act  infringed the Atlasian constitution.

Schedule

Petitioner has 24 hour to file his brief (extension granted following the Petioner's request)[/b].  It is expected no later than 11:00 AM EDT on  Wednesday, October 11, 2017.

Respondent has an additional  24 hours to file his brief.  It is expected no later than 11:00AM EDT on Thursday, October 12, 2017.

Amicus Briefs will be accepted until 11:00AM EDT on Friday, October ,13 2017.

Additional time may be granted to either party, and the right of either party to respond to the filed briefs may be granted upon request.

A period of argument (Q&A) will be scheduled after presentation of the briefs in case any member of the Court has any questions for the parties.

[windjammer]

This supreme court case is withdrawn.

It appears that the plaintiff doesn't give the Supreme Court enough of his interest to just give an update, whether he wants more time or he wants to withdraw.

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

To clarify for casual viewers of this thread, I would have been the respondent in this case by virtue of my position as Southern AG. I did talk to the plaintiff (Bacon King) about this on Thursday on IRC, and he said that he was originally planning to file his brief that morning, but became busy (iirc). I was gone for most of the weekend so I don't know if there were any further developments on IRC, but since nothing else has happened, it's fair to assume that BK is no longer interested in the case.