Tennessee abortion law to be challenged before Trump-appointed judge

The House meets at the state Capitol in Nashville on June 1, 2020. (Erik Schelzig, Tennessee Journal)

When Tennessee Republican lawmakers passed a sweeping abortion ban last week, it was the the expressed hope the measure could be used to challenge precedent set by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision of 1973. A legal challenge filed in federal court in Nashville this week provides an early test as the case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Chip Campbell, whom President Donald Trump appointed to the bench in 2017.

Campbell was a business litigator with Frost Brown Todd before becoming a judge. He is the son of Republican National Committee member Beth Campbell and husband of Anastasia Campbell, the co-director of the General Assembly’s office of legal services.

Unlike some of Trump’s more controversial nominees, Campbell received a “Well Qualified” rating from the American Bar Association. The Senate voted 97-0 to confirm Campbell in January 2018.

32 Responses to Tennessee abortion law to be challenged before Trump-appointed judge

  • Audrey says:

    Sad to set womens health care back.

    • Karen Bracken says:

      What does killing an unborn baby have to do with women’s health? When complications of pregnancy set in (which is VERY rare) the solution is birth. Sometime the baby makes it and sometimes the baby does not but there is never any justification for killing an unborn child. Women need to be accountable for their actions. If you lay down and spread your legs and you are too lazy or too stupid to protect yourself from an unwanted pregnancy then you need to bare the consequences of your irresponsible actions. If you do not want the baby give it to someone that will care for it and give it the love its mother was incapable of giving. Even animals do not murder their own unborn babies. Be honest about what you are doing instead of trying to ease your guilt by calling it “women’s health”. Murder is not about health. It is murder pure and simple. Perhaps you should go back and listen to the hearings of Roe v Wade. Abortion was to be very rare and not passed 12 weeks. Abortion was needed because girls couldn’t finish school if they got pregnant, they could not finish college, they could not hold a job or be hired if pregnant. NONE of those reasons occur today and haven’t for decades.

  • Donna Locke says:

    Conflict of interest there.

  • Beatrice Shaw says:

    Let us decide on our own about our OWN bodies!!

  • Billy Worsham says:

    The body inside the body of a woman is not her body. We do not have the right to destroy that body. As for the woman, she has the right to destroy herself if she wishes. Our tax dollars should not be funding abortions because the public does not receive any benefit of such waste of tax dollars. Neither does the man and woman responsible for the body in the body of a woman.

    • Gail McPeak says:

      Billy, I’d bet my next check you’r a white, republican, christian, male that hates big government . . . . until it’s your opinion legislated on someone else.

  • La Quita V. Martin says:

    Billy Worsham – Clearly you do not have a firm grasp on this issue – Read the Hyde Amendment. As a man, you should take precautions to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. Birth Control is something a man can use even easier than a woman. Do your job.

    • Karen Bracken says:

      The birth control for men is not nearly as effective as birth control used by women. Unless the man gets snipped what he has to use is not effective enough to prevent pregnancy.

  • Stuart I. Anderson says:

    I HAVE A DREAM! I dream one day Roe v. Wade will be regarded as wrongly decided as Dred Scott vs Sandford and Plessy vs. Ferguson, so we can leave the law surrounding abortion to be decided by the voters of each state which will result in the issue being settled one way or the other in 90% of the states including Tennessee so we can end this never-ending and costly bickering once and for all.

    • MARLE says:

      In 2004 Scott Peterson was charged with first degree double homicide for the killing his wife and unborn child. If SHE had murdered the child b/c she didn’t want it …..different story.

      This is either a killing of a human OR its not. And if it is you can’t, Stuart, leave it to the states to allow such a thing. That is the position of Pro-Life advocates.

      • Stuart I. Anderson says:

        Of course that’s the nub of the issue about which there is some disagreement in America. If my constitutional states-rights position prevailed, the majority of voters in each state would decide when life began. In Tennessee I have no doubt the answer would be “at conception” by a comfortable majority and that would be that. Women who wanted an abortion could zip up to Southern Illinois where a thriving abortion industry would be set up for women from Tennessee, Arkansas, Kentucky etc. and we could get on with our lives here in Tennessee without this endless legislative wrangling. Our founding fathers were very wise men indeed.

        • MARLE says:

          I get how states’ rights work as a concept. A state shouldn’t have the right to decide who should or shouldn’t be someone else’s slave or which human’s life should be snuffed out at the whim of another.

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            I know the argument, and you can keep repeating it over and over and over as you and people who disagree with you have done with their argument about women’s bodies for the last 47 years or so but throughout that period they have succeeded in making abortion legal, indeed REQUIRED to be legal, throughout the nation so in practical terms you right to lifers haven’t accomplished a hell of a lot nor does it look as though anything will change in the foreseeable future. I’m simply suggesting that a states right solution which would result in abortion being legal in liberal states but illegal in conservative states is the only way to put this issue behind us in a vast majority of states and in fact what would be the case if we could ever get enough movement conservatives in the Senate who would confirm conservative Supreme Court appointments. Once again the answer is what I call “Job One” which is making the Republican Party more conservative.

          • MARLE says:

            So this IS not a states’ rights issue. It is a Killing of a Human life issue. How can a man be tried for a double homicide of something that is NOT a human life? HOMOcide, get it? Not dogicide or caticide or hippoicide.

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            Let the same arguments go on and on. It’s OK. Perhaps you abortion debaters just like the debate. For you Right-to-Lifers the fact that the “killings” have gone on for 47 years and will go on for the indefinite future seems to make no impression.

            Perhaps it would dawn on some of you that a change in arguments or strategy would be in order. Apparently not. ENJOY.

          • MARLE says:

            How long did slavery “go on’ before it didn’t. Good thing those who opposed slavery didn’t take similar advice. Or maybe you think they should have just shut up and stopped making the same tired ole argument.

        • Eddie White says:

          Stuart, I believe in the concept of states rights as well. However, there are some issues that supersede the states right argument. Abortion, as was slavery is one of them. If it is wrong to kill an unborn baby in Tennessee, it is just as wrong in southern Illinois. I don’t have much faith in the courts, but I respect the effort of Gov Lee and the legislature on this issue.

  • Nancy Corley says:

    If men were the ones who got pregnant and had to go through pregnancy and childbirth, abortions would cost a quarter and be readily available in every service station men’s room.

    And where are all the people who are crying out for the protection of the unborn fetus when the issues of providing and paying for the medical care, quality education, adequate food, safe day care, all the other physical and emotional needs of those now born children??? Looks like many think their responsibility to protect those fetuses end as soon as they are born!

    • Karen Bracken says:

      If you spread your legs and you are unprotected then the problem is you. Perhaps the woman should be thinking about all of the things you mention before she lets her hormones control her common sense and accountability. If you get pregnant and do not want the child or cannot afford to care for the child then give it to one of the many parents that would love the child and can afford to care for the child. Snuffing out a life to cover your stupidity and lack of humanity is murder. You can put lipstick on a pig it is still a pig.

  • James White says:

    Two options, Someone will be dead or someone will be alive. Death or Life. Choose Life.

    • Gail McPeak says:

      That’s the point, someone is making the choice for you. Abortions should be private, safe and rare. The odd thing to me is that all good christian republicans are against providing birth control services. Without birth control your going to have abortions. Oh yeah, unless you unrealistically expect folks to refrain from sex.

      • Stuart I. Anderson says:

        It is with heavy heart that I tell you this Gail because I can imagine how much leftist imagery must mean to you but I am quite familiar with conservative thought and I have the acquaintance of a broad section of conservatives, what you would call “christian republicans,” and I have NEVER read anything or heard anyone say anything against “birth control services” so long as it is not a front racket for abortions. Of course, somewhere there may be a few of the dwindling numbers of orthodox Catholics who feel that way but apparently you believe that this anti-birth control position is generally held on the right and, like in so many other things, you couldn’t be more wrong.

  • MARLE says:

    An orthodox Catholic is one from the Eastern Rite Church. I think you’re mixing your Jews with your Catholics, Stuart.

    • Stuart I. Anderson says:

      Interesting. What do you call Latin Mass, fish on Fridays(?), Catholics who believe in the old-time religion? “Traditionalists”?

  • Pingback: Wednesday, June 24

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *