SCOTUS to review Mississippi abortion statute, grants certiorari

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider gutting the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion nationwide, taking up Mississippi’s bid to revive a Republican-backed state law that bans the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

By hearing the case in their next term, which starts in October and ends in June 2022, the justices will look at whether to overturn a central part of the landmark ruling, a longstanding goal of religious conservatives.

The eventual ruling by the conservative-majority court, expected next year, could allow states to ban abortions before a fetus is viable outside the womb, upending decades of legal precedent. Lower courts ruled against Mississippi’s law.

In the Roe v. Wade decision, subsequently reaffirmed in 1992, the court said that states could not ban abortion before the viability of the fetus outside the womb, which is generally viewed by doctors as between 24 and 28 weeks. The Mississippi law would ban abortion much earlier than that. Other states have backed laws that would ban the procedure even earlier.

“Alarm bells are ringing loudly about the threat to reproductive rights. The Supreme Court just agreed to review an abortion ban that unquestionably violates nearly 50 years of Supreme Court precedent and is a test case to overturn Roe v. Wade,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is among those challenging the law.

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, a Republican, said she is committed to defending the law’s constitutionality.

“The Mississippi legislature enacted this law consistent with the will of its constituents to promote women’s health and preserve the dignity and sanctity of life. I remain committed to advocating for women and defending Mississippi’s legal right to protect the unborn,” Fitch said.

The Roe v. Wade ruling recognized that a constitutional right to personal privacy protects a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion. The court in its 1992 decision, coming in the case Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, reaffirmed the ruling and prohibited laws that place an “undue burden” on a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion.

Abortion opponents are hopeful the Supreme Court will narrow or overturn the Roe v. Wade decision. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority following the addition last year of Republican former President Donald Trump’s third appointee, Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters that Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration is committed to defending abortion rights. Psaki said abortion and access to healthcare have come under “withering and extreme attack” in recent years including through “draconian state laws.”

LOUISIANA RULING

The Supreme Court in a 5-4 June 2020 ruling struck down a Louisiana law that imposed restrictions on doctors who perform abortions. The late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was still on the court at the time, and conservative Chief Justice John Roberts voted with the court’s liberal wing in the ruling. Roberts, however, made it clear that he voted that way because he felt bound by the court’s 2016 ruling striking down a similar Texas law.

The 2018 Mississippi law, like others resembling it passed by Republican-led states, was enacted with full knowledge that was a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.

After the only abortion clinic in Mississippi, Jackson Women’s Health Organization, sued to block the measure, a federal judge in 2018 ruled against the state. The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019 reached the same conclusion.

“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,” 5th Circuit Judge Patrick Higginbotham wrote.

Abortion remains a divisive issue in the United States, as in many countries. Christian conservatives are among those most opposed to it. U.S. abortion rates have steadily declined since the early 1980s, reaching the lowest levels on record in recent years, according to the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute.

Jeanne Mancini, president of the anti-abortion group March for Life, said a ruling limiting abortion to early pregnancy would be in line with many other countries.

The Louisiana case ruling marked the court’s first major abortion decision since Trump appointed Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 and Neil Gorsuch in 2017 as justices. Both voted in favor of Louisiana’s restrictions. If Barrett were to vote on similar lines, conservatives could have a majority to curb abortion rights regardless of how Roberts votes. Trump promised during the 2016 presidential race to appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

The Mississippi appeal had been pending at the court since June 2020. During that time, Ginsburg died and was replaced by Barrett and Trump lost his re-election bid, to be replaced by Biden, who supports abortion rights.

My view is that the Supreme Court will sustain and re-affirm the primary holding in Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1991).

It doesn’t make much sense to me that they’d allow such a well-meaning, long-standing precedent go just because a bunch of Catholic and conservative political action groups choose bombard the Supreme Court with deliberately unconstitutional legislation with the goal of depriving women their right to reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy. This is NOT a rational position for the Supreme Court to entertain, and given the fact that Trump appointed conservatives to the bench with the aimed goal of rolling back these protections, I feel as though @prostasia and other groups ought to take notice.

The freedoms in Roe are constitutionally sound ones, as opposed to those found in Roth/Miller. These radical conservatives wish for nothing more than to bring about Prohibition-levels of morality imposition on the American public because they’ve been deluded by theistic concepts of morality, rather than empirically-sound and reasonable ethical positions. Freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, freedom of, from, and the right to one’s own morality. Roe v. Wade is an embodiment of those concepts, and Roth/Miller are antithetical to it.

I hope my beliefs on the Supreme Court are right, and I hope the Democrats are willing to more seriously consider expanding and packing the Supreme Court.
Because that’s precisely what conservatives will do the next time they assume partisan control.

The right to sexual and reproductive autonomy is what defines a woman’s right to say no, her right to self determination, and more importantly, her right to terminate her pregnancy prior to fetal viability. These rights are what ground a woman’s right to sexual expression. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to overstate how serious these rights are to sexual abuse prevention.

I don’t want to see the US become a third-world right-wing moral autocracy where victims of sexual assault are forced to remain pregnant.

If the freedoms in Roe are in any way undermined, then the freedoms taken from us in getting Roth/Miller overturned are just as undermined.

We need to get on this.