Supreme Court Hears Case on Abortion Rights

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks. The left is warning of the overturning of Roe v Wade while the right is preparing to celebrate.

Summary

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in what could be a landmark case on abortion challenging a Mississippi law that bans abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

• Conservative members of the court were apparently skeptical of the arguments posed by lawyers representing a Mississippi abortion clinic, with the newest justice, Amy Coney Barrett, wondering if laws allowing mothers to “hand over unwanted babies to healthcare facilities without penalty” undermines socioeconomic justifications for abortion rights.
• The Hill characterized the possibility of Roe v Wade being overturned as part of “former President Trump’s last influence” and the Court’s majority acting “in defiance of the three liberal justices” on the court.
• Mississippi’s Solicitor General focused his argument on the medical and social changes since the 1973 Roe decision, saying there is more career flexibility and access to contraception than in 1973.
• Axios reported on concerns among political operatives that a major shift in abortion policy could undermine Republicans’ current advantage in next year’s midterm elections.

• Vox sounded the alarm among the left that “Roe is doomed” as even the most moderate of the conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts, appeared to be open to changing constitutional standards on abortion.
• Huffington Post heralded Justice Sotomayor’s “scathing questions” of Mississippi’s argument about whether “moving the viability line from 24 weeks to 15 weeks” would tarnish the Court’s public reputation.*
• The Atlantic published an op-ed from an abortion rights lawyer who dissected the apparent positions among the conservative members of the Supreme Court, including Justice Neil Gorsuch who appeared “skeptical of the idea that a right to choose abortion exists.”

• National Review’s Charles Cooke argued Roe should be overturned, that even pro-abortion scholars agreed in 1973 that the decision created an “extralegal” right that “is not inferable from the language of the Constitution.”
• Newsmax interviewed Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford who said even overturning Roe v Wade will not stop abortions, but rather move the decisions back to states, who would then set their own abortion laws.
• RedState highlighted Justice Clarence Thomas’ “tough questions” on how abortion is a constitutional right, related it to a woman “ingesting drugs and harming a previable baby” and pondered if she could be charged with child neglect charges.

Author’s Take

*Justice Sotomayor’s concern over the Court’s reputation rather than their constitutional role is unconscionable. That is not what they’re appointed to decide. They interpret the Constitution, not public opinion polls. That is why there are elections for the legislative and executive branches.

Return to Freespoke

© Dallas Gerber, 2021v