Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Trending
    • Australia sues consumer goods giant 3M over ‘forever chemicals’ in firefighting foam
    • Google employee charged with insider trading over Polymarket bets | Crime News
    • Alabama star Amari Allen makes NBA Draft decision
    • Contributor: The case for a silent commute
    • Newsom seeks to shield California elections from federal interference
    • US carries out new strikes in Iran against a military site and drones, official says
    • US returns Palestinian rights expert Francesca Albanese to sanctions list | United Nations News
    • DA not yet ready to make formal charging decision on Josh Jacobs
    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

    Newsom seeks to shield California elections from federal interference

    May 28, 2026
    US News

    Talarico walks back comments on religion and gender after Paxton’s win

    May 28, 2026
    US News

    ‘I don’t care about the midterms’: Trump makes clear he’s in no rush to reach deal with Iran

    May 27, 2026
    Add A Comment
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Most Popular

    Donald Trump threatens to raise tariffs again on Japan

    July 2, 2025

    One In, One Out – Migrant Shuffling Across The UK And France

    October 20, 2025

    Democrat Senator John Fetterman Slams His Own Party for Embracing Socialism: ‘You Are Morons’ (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit

    September 10, 2025
    Our Picks

    Australia sues consumer goods giant 3M over ‘forever chemicals’ in firefighting foam

    May 28, 2026

    Google employee charged with insider trading over Polymarket bets | Crime News

    May 28, 2026

    Alabama star Amari Allen makes NBA Draft decision

    May 28, 2026
    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.