- Gentlemen, start your drones: Judge’s ruling opens door for commercial use
- Soldier who hid, bragged about not saluting flag to be punished — in secret
- ‘Maverick’ of the seas: ‘Top Gun’ school for U.S. ship officers to launch
- Putin declares Sochi Paralympics open amid Ukrainian protest
- ‘In Jesus name, we pray’ sparks ire at Ohio council meeting
- Navy’s first laser weapon ready for prime time; drone killer to deploy this summer
- Billionaire backer: Rick Santorum ‘needs to be heard’ in 2016
- Obamacare fallout: 49 percent pessimistic; 45 percent ‘scared’
- DHS accused of holding U.S. citizen at airport, using emails to pry into her sex life
- Seattle socialist: Minimum-wage discussion skewed by ‘right-wing’ GAO analysis
Taxpayers must pay the freight for over-budget train projects
Topic - Andrew J. Kleinfeld
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has a well-earned reputation as the hippiest, dippiest, most-reversed appellate court in these United States.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals cast a skeptical eye Monday on the country's most restrictive abortion law, which prohibits the procedure after 20 weeks of pregnancy unless there's a medical emergency.
In a concurring opinion, the 9th Circuit's Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld wrote, "Revulsion for a group so intense that one cannot bear to be on property they manage cannot, in a tolerant society, be deemed harm sufficiently concrete as to confer standing to sue."
He said prostate removal and other risky procedures that may not be medically necessary occur often and are not prohibited but left to patients and doctors.