قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / US / What the Alabama Abortion Act really foresees

What the Alabama Abortion Act really foresees



This twin-track objective was clearly the intention of the sponsor of the bill – Rep. Terry Collins (R), who said after the vote: "This bill concerns the contesting of Roe v. Wade and Protecting the life of the unborn child because an unborn child is a person who deserves love and protection. "

It will clearly challenge the judgment, as the prohibition of abortion in all but one case is directly related to that of the abortion The Supreme Court appears to find it contrary to the law to impose an "inappropriate burden" on a woman seeking an abortion before a viable fetus – who can live outside the womb – emerges. And while the Alabama law is the strictest in the nation ̵
1; and therefore most incompatible with established federal law – it is far from the only piece of abortion law that seeks to expand Roe's boundaries. Last month, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed a so-called "Fetal Heartbeat" law prohibiting abortions after a fetal heartbeat was detected that can occur as early as the 6-week mark – a time when some women I may even know that they are pregnant. The Governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, signed a similar move earlier this month.
These laws are appealed almost immediately – and they are added to a growing list of cases that could reach the door of the Supreme Court in the not too distant future. The court is prepared to file a lawsuit in the coming months against a law in Louisiana that would force doctors to gain access to a hospital within 30 miles of a place where abortion is performed According to Joan Biskupic, CNN Supreme Court expert, the court calendar could well mean that a ruling was passed on the Louisiana Law in the summer of 2020 – in the middle of the presidential struggle.

Now the court rejected Texas Louisiana was very similar in 2016. But – and that's the point – it was a very different court, with only eight members to start with, as the Senate Republicans refused to deal with then-President Barack Obama's candidate – Merrick Garland – to meet or hold a hearing for confirmation, as it is too short for the outgoing Obama, such To make a decision. When this ninth place on the square was finally filled, it was Neil Gorsuch, a conservative selected by President Donald Trump.

The other big difference between the 2016 court and today's court? Swing Vote Anthony Kennedy has been exchanged for conservative board Kavanaugh. This means that there are five conservative judges and four liberals at the court. The composition of the new court has convinced many legal experts that the law will be crushed the next time a serious challenge is negotiated for Roe . "Anthony Kennedy is going to retire. Abortion will be illegal in twenty states in 18 months #SCOTUS," CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin tweeted in June 2018.
And Trump himself was transparent about his desire to see Roe overturned. Experience this exchange with "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace in the late stages of the 2016 campaign:

WALLACE: You just said you want the court to protect the second amendment. Do you want to see the court crash Roe against Wade?

TRUMP: Well, if we put on two or maybe three judges, it's going to be that way – it's going to happen and in my opinion that's going to happen automatically because I'm putting pro-life judges to justice.

That – "put on two or maybe three judges" – is, of course, exactly what Trump did in the more than two years he was President.

Other experts are less sure that Roe will be eliminated soon – no matter what Trump thinks. Earlier this month, Biskupic wrote:

"The rapid and dramatic moves of states to ban abortion in the sixth week of pregnancy seem to trigger an immediate battle for Roe v. Wade, which poses such direct challenges to the 1973 milestone Years After each hearing before the Supreme Court, the lawyers of both sides are more concerned about which cases are pending to set the conditions for the final showdown. "

The more likely outcome is how she believes the court is taking incremental steps, at ] Roe instead of extinguishing the law in one fell swoop.

And when one discovers how the court itself would decide on these incremental measures, it may be too easy to look at the five conservative judges and assume that they automatically vote for everything that violates the abortion law.

Chief Justice John Roberts, who was appointed to court by President George W. Bush, has repeatedly stressed his concern over the Court's break with earlier precedents, to which apparently Roe belongs. "It's a jolt for the legal system if you override a precedent," said Roberts to Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) At his confirmation hearing in 2005. "Precedents play an important role in promoting stability and balance." Roberts seemed to adhere to this view in a February ruling in which he campaigned for the four liberal judges to block the law of Louisiana.
And even Kavanaugh acted as a precedent when asked during his confirmation negotiations for Roe . "As a general statement, I understand the importance of the precedent in Roe v. Wade ," he said. (Noteworthy: He wrote a memo from 2003 in which he said the Supreme Court could "overrule." Roe .)

This is about two things. First, there is no doubt that laws such as the Abortion Prohibition in Alabama are aimed at the broader goal of banning abortion nationwide. Second, the court was so mysterious on this matter that it was very difficult to predict with any certainty how and when it might decide on these challenges for Roe .

CORRECTION: This story has been updated to correctly state that the Supreme Court will consider challenging the Law of Louisiana.


Source link