Supreme Court to weigh rollback of abortion rights
With three justices appointed by former President
The dispute is not a direct challenge to a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion that the court first announced in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and reaffirmed 19 years later.
But in considering weakening protections for women who seek pre-viability abortions, the justices could remove some of the underpinnings of a woman's right to choose and lay the groundwork for even more restrictions on abortion, including state bans on abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, as early as six weeks.
The case, from
It involves a state law that would prohibit abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy. The state’s ban had been blocked by lower courts as inconsistent with
“States may regulate abortion procedures prior to viability so long as they do not impose an undue burden on the woman's right, but they may not ban abortions. The law at issue is a ban,” Judge
The
More than 90% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of a woman’s pregnancy, according to the
“Alarm bells are ringing loudly about the threat to reproductive rights. The
Viability “has never been a legitimate way to determine a developing infant’s dignity or to decide anybody’s legal existence,” Bursch said.
The justices had put off action on the case for several months. Justice
Barrett is one of three Trump appointees on the
But that majority no longer exists, even if Roberts, hardly an abortion-rights supporter in his more than 15 years on the court, sides with the more liberal justices.
The
The case is separate from a fight over laws enacted by
A central question in the case is about viability — whether a fetus can survive on its own at 15 weeks. The clinic presented evidence that viability is impossible at 15 weeks, and the appeals court said that the state “conceded that it had identified no medical evidence that a fetus would be viable at 15 weeks.”
But the state argues that viability is an arbitrary standard that doesn't take sufficient account of the state's interest in regulating abortion.
The
Also on Monday the
— Split 6-3 along conservative-liberal lines to rule that prisoners who were convicted by non-unanimous juries before the high court barred the practice a year ago don’t need to be retried. The decision affects prisoners who were convicted in
— Sided unanimously with a man who sued after police entered his home without a warrant and seized his guns. Police said the man was potentially suicidal and that they were performing a “community caretaking” function. The justices said authorities can’t use that justification to enter a home without a warrant.
— Ruled 7-1 that an appeals court should take another look at a lawsuit involving global warming that is in its early stages. Lawyers have been arguing over whether the case belongs in state or federal court.
Study: Hope For US Boost Pushes Global Luxury Goods Recovery
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Checker, LLP: Final Deadline Reminder for Root, Inc. Investors – ROOT
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News