Supreme Court to Hear Oral Arguments Challenging Roe v. Wade in December. Better stock up on popcorn for this one. We’re still looking for abortion in the Constitution.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on Dec. 1, the court announced on Sept. 20.
Mississippi enacted a law in 2018 barring abortions after 15 weeks outside of medical emergencies or the discovery of a severe abnormality in the unborn baby.
U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves, an Obama appointee, struck down the law, finding “it is a facially unconstitutional ban on abortions prior to viability.” A trio of 5th Circuit Court of Appeals judges later upheld the ruling.
View Comments (2)
I am sure Heels Up Harris will be there for the "OraL" arguments....doing what Willie brown taught her...
These ignorant judges keep basing their illogical decisions on "viability." They have no clue what they’re talking about--they're lawyers, not medical doctors. Viability keeps getting pushed back to earlier and earlier in gestation. How are Supreme Court decisions supposed to keep up with advancing technology? And because of technology and training differences, viability in Alaska might not be the same as viability in New York, making the notion utterly unusable by a federal court system. (Pretty soon they'll be growing human babies in warming pods in laboratories, meaning viability will be at conception. Then how stupid will the judges look?) The only matter of law that needs to be decided, the only matter that can decide the issue of abortion, is whether a fetus is a human being. Does the baby have rights or not? Pro-abortionists say no, pro-lifers say yes. Let's make a decision as a nation.
This never was an issue about a woman's body or viability. Viability outside the womb is irrelevant, even a full-term baby needs help once it is outside the womb. And as for a woman's body, there are TWO bodies to consider here, the baby has a body too.
Science suggests a fetus is a human being, able to feel pain, respond to stimuli, and emotionally bond with mother, father, and any twin that happens to be sharing the womb. Therefore I believe it should have all the rights of any other human being. BUT THIS IS AN ISSUE FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, NOT THE COURTS. That's my opinion. Once the legislature decides whether an unborn baby is a human being or not, the court rulings will be easy.