How U.S. abortion rights could take a hit as the Supreme Court term begins
By Lawrence Hurley, Reuters
September 26, 2019
WASHINGTON — With new abortion cases on a fast track to the U.S. Supreme Court, the nine justices will get an opportunity within weeks to take up legal fights over Republican-backed laws that could lead to rulings curbing a woman’s ability to obtain the procedure.
The big question is not so much whether the court, with its 5-4 conservative majority that includes two justices appointed by U.S. President Donald Trump, will take up an appeal that could permit new restrictions on abortion rights, but when it will do so, according to legal experts.
Why anti-abortion groups are backing away from abortion bans
Debate around a Tennessee bill shows a big shift in anti-abortion strategy.
By Anna North
Aug 22, 2019
When legislators in Tennessee debated a bill earlier this month that would ban abortion as soon as a pregnancy can be detected, opposition came from a surprising place: anti-abortion groups.
Though the groups National Right to Life and Tennessee Right to Life oppose abortion, they also oppose the Tennessee ban, because they believe it would never stand up in court. If such a ban were to make it to the Supreme Court, the groups worry it would fail: “There is no objective evidence that we have more than one vote to overturn Roe v. Wade,” said James Bopp, general counsel of the National Right to Life Committee, which describes itself as “the nation’s oldest and largest pro-life organization,” in testimony against the bill.
Why this law could be a bigger threat to Roe v. Wade than near-total abortion bans
An Arkansas law is less sweeping than bans on abortion in places like Alabama. It could be more dangerous for Roe v. Wade.
By Anna North
Jul 24, 2019
Near-total bans on abortion in Alabama and elsewhere around the country have gotten a lot of coverage in recent months.
But an Arkansas law requiring physician certification could have nearly the same effect without banning the procedure outright — and it might have a better shot at surviving a court challenge
U.S. anti-abortion activists once 'chipped away' at Roe vs. Wade — now they've picked up a sledgehammer
Some fear future of 1973 ruling on abortion could be in doubt under a conservative-leaning Supreme Court
Matt Kwong · CBC News
Posted: May 22, 2019
The anti-abortion movement is hitting an aggressive new stride in the United States. Whether it breaks into a sprint toward the Supreme Court is worrying reproductive rights activists amid a renewed push to reverse the long-standing precedent that legalized abortions.
As part of a frenzy of recent legislative activity, Alabama and Missouri last week sought to criminalize nearly all abortions in a bid to dismantle Roe vs. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized a woman's right to have the procedure.
A Supreme Court Reporter Defines the Threat to Abortion Rights
By Isaac Chotiner
May 14, 2019
The past two weeks have been some of the worst on record for abortion rights in the U.S. Last week, the governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, signed a bill that outlaws abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Now Alabama is planning to go a step further, with the country’s most extreme anti-abortion law. Under the proposed legislation, abortion would be criminalized, with no exceptions for cases of rape or incest; doctors could face a ninety-nine-year prison sentence for terminating a pregnancy. The Alabama House has passed the bill, and the Senate is expected to vote on the measure on Tuesday evening.
Both the Georgia and Alabama laws are sure to be challenged in court, but the legal climate surrounding abortion is different than it was just last year. After the replacement of the Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy with Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Chief Justice John Roberts is the swing vote, and many conservatives have reason to hope that the Court will rule in favor of new restrictions on abortion and eventually even overturn Roe v. Wade.
What Brett Kavanaugh’s Dishonest Anti-Abortion Dissent Reveals About His Supreme Court Agenda
February 17 2019
The most obvious thing about the Supreme Court’s decision to stay a Louisiana law that would have shuttered two of the state’s three remaining abortion clinics is that it was Chief Justice John Roberts who stopped that from happening. Roberts joined the court’s four more liberal justices to deliver a 5-4 majority that maintains the status quo, for now, and keeps the clinics open.
What is perhaps less obvious, at least at first glance, is the level of intellectual dishonesty baked into a four-page dissent penned by the court’s newest justice, Brett Kavanaugh.
When Judges Defy the Supreme Court
The chief justice faces a time of great testing, both of himself and of the institution he heads, as the lower courts move rapidly even to his right.
By Linda Greenhouse, Contributing Opinion Writer
Feb. 14, 2019
No, I wasn’t surprised last week, as most people apparently were, when Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding fifth vote to preserve access to abortion in Louisiana for at least a little while longer. In fact, I had predicted it (and I have witnesses).
Why? Not because I think the chief justice has developed a soft spot in his heart for the right to abortion. He has not. Not because he wants to minimize the Supreme Court’s role as a combatant in the culture wars. I think he does, but that’s not the point.
Rather, circumstances compelled the chief justice to stand up to a stunning act of judicial defiance.
John Roberts plays a waiting game on ‘Roe v. Wade’
By Harry Litman, Contributing columnist
February 13, 2019
The Supreme Court last week suspended a Louisiana abortion law, the justices' first significant action in an abortion case since the appointment of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. What does the decision portend for the future of Roe v. Wade in particular and reproductive rights in general?
The case, June Medical Services v. Gee, centers on a challenge to a provision in the Louisiana law (named, tellingly, “the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act”) requiring doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles of the clinic where they perform abortions. The ostensible idea is to have quick access to a hospital in the event something goes awry, threatening the health of the mother. Critics argued that the effect of the law would be to reduce to one (from the current four) the number of doctors who can perform abortions at the state’s three operating clinics.
Brett Kavanaugh shows true colours in supreme court abortion dissent
The supreme court blocked a Louisiana Trap law but Trump’s controversial pick showed Roe v Wade is not safe in his hands
Sat 9 Feb 2019
There are about 4.6 million people in Louisiana. Guess how many abortion clinics there are? Three. There are just three. Which I suppose is actually quite a lot when you consider that a number of American states have only one.
On Thursday Louisiana narrowly avoided becoming a new member of the one-clinic club. The US supreme court voted 5-4 to block a Louisiana law that would have dramatically reduced access to legal abortions in the state. Opponents of the law said it would have meant only one doctor would have been eligible to perform abortions in the entire state.
Stop fooling yourself. Roe is gone.
by Paul Waldman
July 9, 2018
For years, the right has treated the Supreme Court as the ultimate consideration when strategizing about presidential and even congressional politics, a prize worth doing anything to seize, whether it’s rallying around candidates whom it has misgivings about or finding repugnant and indefensible procedural maneuvers, such as refusing to consider an appointee simply because he was nominated by a president of the other party.
Democrats, on the other hand, have thought of control of the court as only one goal among many — important, sure, but not much more important than whether we can achieve health-care reform or a higher minimum wage, and certainly not worth setting aside concerns about procedural fairness.