Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Trending
    • Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ passes the House of Representatives
    • Trump Meets With House GOP Holdouts Ahead of Key Megabill Vote
    • Trump wins major victory as Congress passes flagship bill
    • Russia becomes first country to recognise Afghanistan’s Taliban government | Taliban News
    • Astros GM ‘encouraged’ by latest info on Yordan Alvarez’s injury
    • Contributor: A plan to take human rights off the table at the State Department
    • The 2 House Republicans who voted no on Trump’s sweeping domestic policy bill
    • Early Computer Science Education Sparks Interest
    Prime US News
    • Home
    • World News
    • Latest News
    • US News
    • Sports
    • Politics
    • Opinions
    • More
      • Tech News
      • Trending News
      • World Economy
    Prime US News
    Home»US News»Supreme Court declines to hear dispute over Montana abortion consent law
    US News

    Supreme Court declines to hear dispute over Montana abortion consent law

    Team_Prime US NewsBy Team_Prime US NewsJuly 3, 2025No Comments1 Min Read
    Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Reddit Telegram Email
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email


    The Supreme Court docket on Thursday declined to take up a dispute over a Montana legislation that might have required notarized parental consent for a minor to obtain an abortion.

    State lawmakers have argued that oldsters have a constitutional proper to make selections regarding the care, custody and management of their youngsters.

    Deliberate Parenthood of Montana, in difficult the legislation, argued that minors have a constitutional proper to privateness that can’t be infringed.

    A normal view of the U.S. Supreme Court docket constructing in Washington, June 1, 2024.

    Will Dunham/Reuters

    The Montana Supreme Court docket struck down the legislation on state constitutional grounds. The U.S. Supreme Court docket now leaves that call in place.

    Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch stated they agreed with the Supreme Court docket’s determination to not hear the case, saying it “gives a poor car” for addressing the constitutional query concerning the rights of oldsters, which they prompt they’re open to resolving in a future case.



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Previous ArticleWho is Rachel Reeves’ sister? Meet Labour MP Ellie Reeves
    Next Article Vaccines save millions of lives. Don’t let RFK Jr. diminish them
    Team_Prime US News
    • Website

    Related Posts

    US News

    The 2 House Republicans who voted no on Trump’s sweeping domestic policy bill

    July 3, 2025
    US News

    Juror in Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial pushes back on claim that celebrity influence played a role in verdict

    July 3, 2025
    US News

    4 dead, 14 wounded in Chicago mass shooting, police say

    July 3, 2025
    Add A Comment
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Most Popular

    19-Year-Old’s Breasts Balloon from B Cup to Triple G After Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine — Researchers Call It First-of-its-Kind Case | The Gateway Pundit

    January 7, 2025

    Opinion: L.A. fires and East Coast ice are no coincidence

    January 16, 2025

    Federal court says Trump doesn’t have the power to impose tariffs unilaterally

    May 29, 2025
    Our Picks

    Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ passes the House of Representatives

    July 3, 2025

    Trump Meets With House GOP Holdouts Ahead of Key Megabill Vote

    July 3, 2025

    Trump wins major victory as Congress passes flagship bill

    July 3, 2025
    Categories
    • Latest News
    • Opinions
    • Politics
    • Sports
    • Tech News
    • Trending News
    • US News
    • World Economy
    • World News
    • Privacy Policy
    • Disclaimer
    • Terms and Conditions
    • About us
    • Contact us
    Copyright © 2024 Primeusnews.com All Rights Reserved.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.