Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that declared a nationwide right to abortion, is facing its most serious challenge in 30 years in front of a court with a 6-3 conservative majority that has been remade by three appointees of President Donald Trump.

“There are no half measures here,” said Sherif Girgis, a Notre Dame law professor who once served as a law clerk for Justice Samuel Alito.

A ruling that overturned Roe and the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey would lead to outright bans or severe restrictions on abortion in 26 states, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion rights.

The case being argued Wednesday comes from Mississippi, where a 2018 law would ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, well before viability. The Supreme Court has never allowed states to ban abortion before the point at roughly 24 weeks when a fetus can survive outside the womb.

The justices are separately weighing disputes over Texas’ much earlier abortion ban, at roughly six weeks, though those cases turn on the unique structure of the law and how it can be challenged in court, not the abortion right. Still, abortion rights advocates were troubled by the court’s 5-4 vote in September to allow the Texas law, which relies on citizen lawsuits to enforce it, to take effect in the first place.

“This is the most worried I’ve ever been,” said Shannon Brewer, who runs the only abortion clinic in Mississippi, the Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

The clinic offers abortions up to 16 weeks of pregnancy and about 10% of abortions it performs take place after the 15th week, Brewer said.

She also noted that since the Texas law took effect, the clinic has seen a substantial increase in patients, operating five days or six days a week instead of two or three.

Lower courts blocked the Mississippi law, as they have other abortion bans that employ traditional enforcement methods by state and local officials.

The Supreme Court had never before even agreed to hear a case over a pre-viability abortion ban. But after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death last year and her replacement by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the third of Trump’s appointees, the court said it would take up the case.

Trump had pledged to appoint “pro-life justices” and predicted they would lead the way in overturning the abortion rulings. Only one justice, Clarence Thomas, has publicly called for Roe to be overruled.

The court could uphold the Mississippi law without explicitly overruling Roe and Casey, an outcome that would satisfy neither side.

Abortion-rights advocates say that result would amount to the same thing as an outright ruling overturning the earlier cases because it would erase the rationale undergirding nearly a half-century of Supreme Court law.

“A decision upholding this ban is tantamount to overruling Roe. The ban prohibits abortion around two months before viability,” said Julie Rikelman, who will argue the case for the clinic.

On the other side, abortion opponents argue that the court essentially invented abortion law in Roe and Casey, and shouldn’t repeat that mistake in this case.

If the justices uphold Mississippi’s law, they’ll have to explain why, said Thomas Jipping, a Heritage Foundation legal fellow. They can either overrule the two big cases, Jipping said, “or they’re going to have to come up with another made-up rule.”

Conservative commentator Ed Whelan said such an outcome would be a “massive defeat” on par with the Casey decision in 1992, in which a court with eight justices appointed by Republican presidents unexpectedly reaffirmed Roe.

This court appears far more conservative than the one that decided Casey, and legal historian Mary Ziegler at Florida State University’s law school, said the court probably would “overrule Roe or set us on a path to doing so.”

Chief Justice John Roberts might find the more incremental approach appealing if he can persuade a majority of the court to go along. Since Roberts became chief justice in 2005, the court has moved in smaller steps on some issues, even when it appeared there was only a binary choice.

It took two cases for the court to rip out the heart of the federal Voting Rights Act that curbed potentially discriminatory voting laws in states with a history of discrimination.

In the area of organized labor, the court moved through a series of cases that chipped away at public sector unions’ power.

The high court also heard two rounds of arguments over restrictions on independent spending in the political arena before removing limits on how much money corporations and unions can pour into election advocacy.

If the court looks to public sentiment, it would find poll after poll that shows support for preserving Roe, though some surveys also find backing for greater restrictions on abortion.

Mississippi is one of 12 states ready to act almost immediately if Roe is overturned. Those states have enacted so-called abortion trigger laws that would take effect and ban all or nearly all abortions.

Women in those states wanting abortions could face drives of hundreds of miles to reach the nearest clinic or they might obtain abortion pills by mail. Medication abortions now account for 40% of abortions.

Some legal briefs in the case make clear that the end of Roe is not the ultimate goal of abortion opponents.

The court should recognize that “unborn children are persons” under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, a conclusion that would compel an end to almost all legal abortions, Princeton professor Robert George and scholar John Finnis wrote. Finnis was Justice Neil Gorsuch’s adviser on his Oxford dissertation, an argument against assisted suicide.

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/supreme-court-set-to-take-up-all-or-nothing-abortion-fight

The post Supreme Court set to take up all-or-nothing abortion fight first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Appeals court reinstates Texas abortion law first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

US District Judge Robert Pitman in Austin granted the request, preventing the state from enforcing the Republican-backed law, while its legality is being challenged.

The controversial law prohibits women from obtaining an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy – a time when many women do not yet know they are pregnant.

It makes no exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest.

“This court will not sanction one more day of this offensive deprivation of such an important right,” Judge Pitman said in the ruling.

The ink was barely dry on Judge Pitman’s order before Texas notified the court that it intends to appeal the ruling to the conservative-leaning Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, setting the stage for the next phase of the legal battle.

“Tonight’s ruling is an important step forward toward restoring the constitutional rights of women across the state of Texas,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement.

“The fight has only just begun, both in Texas and in many states across this country where women’s rights are currently under attack,” she added.

Mr. Biden’s Justice Department sued Texas last month and sought a temporary injunction against the law, arguing during a 1 October hearing that the measure violates the US Constitution.

The US Supreme Court on 1 September let the law take effect in a 5-4 vote powered by conservative justices.

The law also lets ordinary citizens enforce the ban, rewarding them at least $10,000 (€8,655) if they successfully sue anyone who helped provide an abortion after fetal cardiac activity is detected.

Critics of the law have said this provision enables people to act as anti-abortion bounty hunters.

The Justice Department argued that the law impedes women from exercising their constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy that was recognised in the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalised abortion nationwide.

The department also argued that the law improperly interferes with the operations of the federal government to provide abortion-related services.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland lauded the ruling as a “victory for women in Texas”.

Planned Parenthood said the preliminary injunction means lawsuits filed under the law cannot be accepted by Texas courts.

“The relief granted by the court today is overdue, and we are grateful that the Department of Justice moved quickly to seek it,” Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson said in a statement.

Whole Woman’s Health, which has four clinics in Texas, said it was making plans to resume abortions up to 18 weeks “as soon as possible”.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, has defended the legality of the state’s abortion law, with this office saying in a statement: “The most precious freedom is life itself.”

Judge Pitman heard about three hours of arguments on the Justice Department’s request.

Justice Department attorney Brian Netter called the law an “unprecedented scheme of vigilante justice” that must be struck down.

Will Thompson, an attorney in the Texas Attorney General’s Office, countered the department’s arguments, saying there were plenty of opportunities for people in Texas to challenge the law on their own.

He said the department’s arguments were filled with “hyperbole and inflammatory rhetoric”.

This case is part of a fierce legal battle over abortion access in the US, with numerous states pursuing restrictions.

US conservatives have long sought to have Roe v Wade overturned.

The Supreme Court on 1 December will hear arguments in a separate case involving a Mississippi law that bans abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

Mississippi has asked the high court to overturn the 1973 precedent.

Source: https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2021/1007/1251233-abortion-texas/

The post US judge temporarily blocks Texas abortion law first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Demonstrators gathered in front of the Governor’s Mansion in Austin to protest against Senate Bill 8, an anti-abortion bill that Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law this morning.   Credit: Evan L’Roy/The Texas Tribune

Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law Wednesday a measure that would prohibit in Texas abortions as early as six weeks — before some women know they are pregnant — and open the door for almost any private citizen to sue abortion providers and others.

The signing of the bill opens a new frontier in the battle over abortion restrictions as first-of-its-kind legal provisions — intended to make the law harder to block — are poised to be tested in the courts.

Abortion rights advocates have promised to challenge the new law, which they consider one of the most extreme nationwide and the strictest in Texas since the landmark Roe v. Wade decision. It would amount to an outright ban on abortions, as the six-week cutoff is two weeks after a missed menstrual cycle, opponents say.

The law takes effect in September.

“Our creator endowed us with the right to life and yet millions of children lose their right to life every year because of abortion,” Abbott said in a bill signing ceremony, captured on videos posted on social media. The Legislature “worked together on a bipartisan basis to pass a bill that I’m about to sign that ensures that the life of every unborn child who has a heartbeat will be saved from the ravages of abortion.”

The governor’s signature comes just after the U.S. Supreme Court said it would hear a case concerning a Mississippi law that would ban most abortions after 15 weeks, and which could lead to new limits on abortion rights. It is the first major abortion case heard before the court’s newly expanded conservative majority, and could have far-reaching effects for Texas, where a pending bill would outlaw nearly all abortions if the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade.

Senate Bill 8 was a top priority for Republican lawmakers, nearly all of whom signed on as an author or sponsor of the measure.

The bill bans abortions after whenever an ultrasound can detect what lawmakers defined as a fetal “heartbeat,” which can be as early as six weeks into pregnancy. Medical and legal experts say the term is misleading because embryos don’t possess a heart at that developmental stage.

It includes cases where the woman was impregnated as a result of rape or incest. There is an exception for medical emergencies.

Similar bills have been passed by other states and held up by the courts, but Texas’ version has a twist.

Instead of having the government enforce the law, the bill turns the reins over to private citizens — who are newly empowered to sue abortion providers or anyone who helps someone get an abortion after a fetal “heartbeat” has been detected. The person would not have to be connected to someone who had an abortion or to a provider to sue.

Proponents of the new law hope to get around the legal challenges that have tied up abortion restrictions in the courts. While abortion providers typically sue the state to stop a restrictive abortion law from taking effect, there’s no state official enforcing Senate Bill 8 — so there’s no one to sue, the bill’s proponents say.

“It’s a very unique law and it’s a very clever law,” said Josh Blackman, a constitutional law professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. “Planned Parenthood can’t go to court and sue Attorney General [Ken] Paxton like they usually would because he has no role in enforcing the statute. They have to basically sit and wait to be sued.”

Legal experts have been divided on the strategy, and abortion rights advocates have said they plan to fight regardless.

Elisabeth Smith, chief counsel for state policy and advocacy at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which has represented abortion providers who have sued Texas officials, said it and other abortion rights organizations are “not going to let this six-week ban go unchallenged.”

Drucilla Tigner, policy and advocacy strategist of the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, said the “governor’s swipe of a pen can’t change the Constitution.”

While the law amounts to the most extreme abortion ban in the country, “abortion is both legal in Texas and supported by the majority of Texans,” Tigner said.

Abortion rights advocates and lawyers say the new law would allow for a cascade of lawsuits against abortion providers that would sap their time and money even if they ultimately won in court.

Family members, abortion funds, rape crisis counselors and other medical professionals could be open to lawsuits, under the broad language in the bill, according to legal experts and physicians who opposed the measure. People who sued would be awarded at least $10,000, as well as costs for attorney’s fees, if they won.

“Every citizen is now a private attorney general,” Blackman said. “You can have random people who are against abortion start suing tomorrow.”

John Seago, with Texas Right to Life, an anti-abortion organization that supported the bill, said he doubted there would be an “overwhelming number of cases on day one.”

Lawsuits might be filed by anti-abortion activists who learned through talking to the woman that she got an abortion after six weeks.

“There’s going to be a lot of different (fact) patterns that could lead to the case,” he said. But the bill isn’t “throwing out the typical way that the judicial system works — there’s still going to be a judge, there’s still going to be depositions, there’s going to be a high bar” before fees are awarded.

The ultimate goal, he said, is to incentivize abortion providers to comply with the law instead of fighting it in court.

They can “easily avoid all of that,” Seago said. “Have a public statement. Put it on their website that they’re not scheduling appointments after six weeks.”

The bill does not allow rapists to sue, but abortion rights advocates say the wording offers flimsy protection as most rapes and sexual assaults aren’t reported and don’t result in a conviction.

Most abortions in Texas were prohibited after about 20 weeks. Pill-induced abortions were barred at 10 weeks. An abortion provider must perform a sonogram on the woman 24 hours before the abortion and give them information about medical risks, abortion alternatives and assistance available to those who follow through with their pregnancy.

More than 56,600 abortions were performed on Texas residents in 2019, according to state statistics, most of them in the first trimester.

Proponents of the law celebrated its signing.

“The Legislature and Governor prioritized this historic legislation, and with his signature, approximately 50,000 precious human lives will be saved in Texas next year alone!” said Chelsey Youman, with Human Coalition Action, an anti-abortion organization.

Texas Right to Life called the bill’s signing a “landmark victory,” but said a more comprehensive measure was still waiting for a vote in the Legislature.

“Texas Right to Life reminds our elected officials of their solemn duty to protect the lives of their citizens, especially the most vulnerable and innocent Texans in the womb. The signing of the Texas Heartbeat Act marks a historic step in the battle to protect Life,” the organization said.

Opponents of the legislation condemned its passage.

Dyana Limon-Mercado, executive director of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes, the political arm of Planned Parenthood affiliates in Texas, said the six-week cutoff amounted to an effective ban on abortions in the state.

“When you factor in the time it takes to confirm a pregnancy, consider your options and make a decision, schedule an appointment and comply with all the restrictions politicians have already put in place for patients and providers, a six-week ban essentially bans abortion outright,” she said.

Amy Hagstrom Miller, head of Whole Woman’s Health, an abortion provider that has four clinics in Texas, said the law will have a “chilling effect.”

Protesters have previously falsely reported Whole Woman’s Health clinics to state health officials for allegedly having the wrong water heater permit, not following social distancing protocols during the pandemic, and other perceived regulatory infractions, she said.

The “false reports disrupt health care services and this culture of threats and accusations is designed to intimidate providers,” she said.

About 90% of women who come to Whole Woman’s Health clinics are more than six weeks into their pregnancy, she said.

Whole Woman’s Health has sued Texas over abortion restrictions, and won a 2016 case that went up to the Supreme Court.

The bill was opposed by more than 300 Texas lawyers who said it undermined longstanding rules and tenets of the legal system, including that a person must be injured to sue.

The law would also let someone file a lawsuit in their home county against an abortion clinic, and stop the case from being transferred to a different venue.

In practice, legal experts say it would be more costly and difficult for abortion providers to play legal defense before a judge hundreds of miles away, and it could let anti-abortion advocates be heard in courts that they think will be more sympathetic.

Seago, with Texas Right to Life, said it “will be interesting to see (how) the other kind of alternative avenues (handle) these debates.”

“We know how Judge (Lee) Yeakel and Judge (Sam) Sparks handle these cases,” he said, referring to two federal judges who reliably strike down Texas abortion restrictions.

Disclosure: Planned Parenthood has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Source: https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/18/texas-heartbeat-bill-abortions-law/

The post Gov. Greg Abbott signs into law one of nation’s strictest abortion measures, banning procedure as early as six weeks into a pregnancy first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.