Appeals court overrules Trump ideologue appointee on abortion rights of immigrant

I've railed against some of Trump's cabinet appointees who either know nothing about the departments they've been put in charge of (DeVos, Peery, Carson) -- or some who know enough to destroy them (Pruitt, Price, Zinke).

We're now beginning to hear about dangerous appointees lower down, the assistant secretaries or the heads of subcabinet agencies.   Like a woman who came directly from a high-level chemical industry position, who is now re-writing EPA policies to deregulate environmentally toxic chemicals, some of which pose serious health risks to humans.  Then there's the latest outrage, Scott Lloyd, the head of the Office of Refugee Resettlement,

Currently a 17 year old undocumented immigrant is being held in a Texas detention center by the Office of Refugee Resettlement.   After she was taken into custody a few weeks ago, she discovered that she is pregnant.  An unaccompanied minor, she has followed Texas state law and has obtained a judge's waiver that allows her to obtain an abortion.   All done perfectly legally, following the procedures set up by the law.

Except that the head of the agency that has her confined to a detention center, Scott Lloyd, happens to be an anti-abortion zealot.  He and his staff have so far refused to allow the young woman in their custody to obtain the legally authorized abortion -- claiming that they would be "facilitating" an action contrary to their mission of "promoting child birth and fetal life."

Even though they are physically preventing her from leaving the detention center to have the abortion, they argue that they are not placing an "undue burden" on her -- the very low legal bar that, even in Texas, keeps a few abortion facilities operating.   Their reason why there is no "undue burden?   I kid you not -- they say she can always go back where she came from and get an abortion there.   But "where she came from" is a Central American country that criminalizes abortions.

There is some urgency if she is to be allowed the abortion.   It has taken over a month to get to this point, obtaining the waiver and then the court process;  and her pregnancy is now estimated at 17 to 18 weeks.   Texas law bans abortions after 20 weeks.

So where does it stand?   The ACLU has taken her case and got a judgment from an appeals court that ruled that she must be allowed to have the abortion here.  A three judge panel from that court originally gave the government until October 31st to find a "sponsor" so that the government does not have to make the arrangements.  But they have already rejected two proposed sponsors.

The ACLU requested a hearing before the full Appeals Court, and they affirmed the permission and removed the other clause about seeking a sponsor.   The full court will not allow the government to "run out the clock," as it seemed to be doing.

We are a deeply divided country on the moral questions about abortion and whether it should be legal.   But in our current law it is still legal in the U.S., with some limits.   And yet a woman in government custody was being deprived of her rights within those limits, which could have expired with the state's delays.

As a sidelight, they claim they couldn't transport her to have an abortion;  but they had no qualms about transporting her to a "pregnancy center" to be counseled and coerced about not having an abortion.

This is a blatant example of individuals misusing their power to impose their own beliefs to subvert the law and a person's rights under that law.

It takes us one more step toward autocracy.   In our case, it seems to be a weird Trumpian blend of oligarchy and theocracy -- but in any case an autocracy that is eroding our democracy in the direction of totalitarianism.

Ralph

Update 10-25-17.  Following the Appeals Court directive to the government to stop blocking this young woman's legal right, she was allowed to have the procedure.   A senior staff attorney for the ACLU gave this statement:
"Justice prevailed today for Jane Doe.  But make no mistake about it, the Administration's efforts to interfere in women's decisions won't stop with Jane.  With this case we have seen the astonishing lengths this administration will go to block women from abortion care.  We will not stop fighting until we have justice for every woman like Jane."