US fails to evacuate Americans from totalitarian theocracy as extremists take over

[Being]

This would be an incredibly relevant comment if every new law violated constitutionally guaranteed rights; as that is not the case, the comment is not relevant.

The constitutionality of this law has yet to be ruled on by any court. You don't start the process at the highest court in the system.

[Aimless]

The constitutionality of this law has yet to be ruled on by any court. You don't start the process at the highest court in the system.

There are reasonable grounds for believing the law is unconstitutional, and there is an imperative to prevent the application of a self-evidently—or even likely—unconstitutional law that violates individuals' constitutionally guaranteed rights.

Blocking the application of the law, at this stage, on an emergency basis, was entirely within the remit of SCOTUS—and turning to SCOTUS was one of the available options; as such, it's silly to portray this as a violation of "the process". It's especially silly because "the process" did, in fact, begin in lower courts—with WWH only turning to SCOTUS for emergency relief after the 5th circuit court of appeals decided to obstruct the process by canceling the planned preliminary injunction hearing on short notice just days before the law went into effect. They didn't start with SCOTUS—SCOTUS was the third court.

Even apart from this, your implicit view of "the process" is honestly a little infantile; the process for determining the constitutionality of a law never begins in court—it begins before the drafting stage. Proposals that are self-evidently unconstitutional should never even make it to the drafting stage. If your personal process for determining the constitutionality of a law begins in court, then maybe that's an intellectual limitation you can work on.

[Being]

...

Let's remember how Roe Vs Wade made its way to SCOTUS.

Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client in U.S. federal court against their client's local district attorney, Henry Wade, alleging that Texas's abortion laws were unconstitutional. A three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas heard the case and ruled in her favor. Texas then appealed this ruling directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. SCOTUS ruled abortion legal and tying state regulation of abortion to the three trimesters of pregnancy.

20 years later...

The Supreme Court abandoned Roe's trimester framework in favor of a standard based on fetal viability and overruled Roe's requirement that government regulations on abortion be reviewed under the strict scrutiny standard.

Not that it matters since this new law does not involve government scrutiny at all. Which is why a new case must work through the system to determine the constitutionality.

[Aimless]

Let's remember how Roe Vs Wade made its way to SCOTUS.

Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client in U.S. federal court against their client's local district attorney, Henry Wade, alleging that Texas's abortion laws were unconstitutional. A three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas heard the case and ruled in her favor. Texas then appealed this ruling directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. SCOTUS ruled abortion legal and tying state regulation of abortion to the three trimesters of pregnancy.

20 years later...

The Supreme Court abandoned Roe's trimester framework in favor of a standard based on fetal viability and overruled Roe's requirement that government regulations on abortion be reviewed under the strict scrutiny standard.

Not that it matters since this new law does not involve government scrutiny at all. Which is why a new case must work through the system to determine the constitutionality.

While I acknowledge that you have indeed used the words "court", "Texas", "abortion", "laws", "unconstitutional", "case", "ruling" and "SCOTUS", I feel obligated to point out that your post doesn't seem to have any real relevance to the broader discussion—or, indeed, to your own tangent about "the process"

[Being]

Enlighten me.