Friend,
The Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments today over a Mississippi Pro-Life law that protects preborn children at 15 weeks’ gestation.
The main question justices will consider in this case (Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization) is whether all early abortion bans are unconstitutional. Current abortion precedent allows abortion at any time in pregnancy for any reason. However, this case could actually overturn Roe v. Wade ENTIRELY.
If Roe is reversed, the legality of abortion will then be decided by state legislatures.
VIDEO: New Supreme Court Case Could END Roe v. Wade
|
|
We likely won't receive a ruling in this case until June when the court's current term ends, but today's arguments are significant because the proceedings may signal how the justices are leaning.
The court’s most liberal justices suggested Roe is too entrenched, and the abortion issue too political, to reverse the decision. Notably, justices and the pro-abortion advocates had much difficulty defending the idea that the so-called "right" to abortion is actually rooted in the Constitution.
The most insightful questions came from the six Republican-appointed justices, who will determine the outcome of Dobbs.
Chief Justice John Roberts directed his criticism at the idea enshrined in Roe that abortions before a baby can survive outside the womb (viability) are constitutional while those after are not. He believes viability as a cutoff is unprincipled but seemed to search for another potential line the court could draw, resulting in a decision that would save Mississippi’s Pro-Life law without reversing Roe.
Justice Neil Gorsuch asked both the Pro-Life and pro-abortion advocates to furnish a new cutoff point. None did so, which prompted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Samuel Alito to stress that no such line exists and that Dobbs is an all-or-nothing case—Roe must be reversed to logically support Mississippi’s law.
|
|
Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s questions appeared to reveal she doesn’t think reliance on Roe is a strong argument either way. Pregnant mothers have more options beyond abortion and parenthood (such as adoption) today than in the past.
Perhaps the most illuminating line of questioning came from Justice Kavanaugh, who many believe is the swing justice on the court. Abortion appears nowhere in the Constitution’s text, history, or tradition. Kavanaugh suggested that if the court is to be a neutral institution, wouldn't the most neutral option be to let the legislatures decide? A neutral ruling, Justice Kavanaugh seemed to imply, is to reverse Roe and take abortion policy out of the courts.
Indeed, abortion policy had no business being in the courts in the first place. Roe was wrong in 1973 and remains wrong today.
The Supreme Court should reject Chief Justice Roberts’ middle-ground proposal and reverse Roe v. Wade entirely, letting the states be the arbiters of abortion policy.
The tide seems to be turning.
Next June, Roe may finally fall. Today, the justices signaled that possibility is more likely than many previously thought.
|
|
|
We want to hear from YOU! Will you voice your opinion right now on whether the Supreme Court should overturn Roe?
|
|
For Life,
Texas Right to Life
|
|
|
|
