Abortion rights face stern new test at conservative U.S. Supreme Court

[webfact]

Abortion rights face stern new test at conservative U.S. Supreme Court

By Lawrence Hurley

 

FILE PHOTO: An anti abortion activist rallies outside the U.S. Supreme Court during the the 47th annual March for Life in Washington, U.S., January 24, 2020. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court this week gets its first chance to consider new curbs on abortion rights with President Donald Trump's two conservative appointees on the bench as it examines the legality of a Louisiana law that could force two of the state's three clinics that perform the procedure to shut down.

 

The court, with a 5-4 conservative majority, is scheduled on Wednesday to hear arguments in an appeal by Shreveport-based abortion provider Hope Medical Group for Women seeking to invalidate the law. Chief Justice John Roberts may be pivotal in deciding the outcome, with Trump's appointees Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch also in the spotlight.

 

The clinic sued to block the 2014 law, which requires that doctors who perform abortions have a difficult-to-obtain arrangement called "admitting privileges" at a hospital within 30 miles (48 km) of the abortion clinic. A federal appeals court ruled against the clinic and upheld the law.

 

The Supreme Court struck down a similar Texas requirement in 2016 when conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy, who retired in 2018, joined the four liberal justices to defend abortion rights. Trump has tightened the conservative grip on the court with his 2018 appointment of Kavanaugh, who replaced Kennedy, and his 2017 appointment of Gorsuch.

 

In their prior stints as federal appellate judges, neither Kavanaugh nor Kennedy ruled directly on abortion rights. But Trump promised during the 2016 presidential race to appoint justices who would overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that recognized a woman's constitutional right to an abortion and legalized it nationwide.

 

The Louisiana case will test the willingness of the court to uphold Republican-backed abortion restrictions being pursued in numerous conservative states.

 

Roberts, a conservative, cast the deciding vote when the court last year on a 5-4 vote blocked Louisiana's law from going into effect while the litigation over its legality continued.

 

When the Supreme Court in 1992 reaffirmed Roe v. Wade, it prohibited laws that placed an "undue burden" on a woman's ability to obtain an abortion. In the Texas case, Roberts concluded that an admitting privileges requirement did not represent an undue burden, but he was in the minority in the ruling.

 

Known to be concerned about the court's institutional reputation and integrity, Roberts may be wary about reversing such a recent precedent even though he was one of the dissenters in the 2016 case.

 

"Everyone is looking to the chief justice to see what he is going to do," said Nicole Saharsky, a lawyer who regularly argues at the Supreme Court.

 

Baton Rouge-based U.S. District Judge John deGravelles cited the undue burden precedent when he struck down Louisiana's law in 2016, prompting the state to appeal to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The 5th Circuit upheld the law despite the 2016 precedent, concluding there was no evidence any Louisiana clinic would close due to the admitting privileges requirement.

 

'OPEN DEFIANCE'

Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights legal advocacy group representing the Hope clinic, said the justices must know that Louisiana's law was in "open defiance" of their 2016 precedent.

 

"The real issue for the court in this case is: are they going to follow their own precedent from four years ago?" Northup said.

 

Louisiana Solicitor General Liz Murrill, who is defending the law, said "big differences" between the Texas and Louisiana laws mean the justices do not need to treat them the same way.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court this week gets its first chance to consider new curbs on abortion rights with President Donald Trump's two conservative appointees on the bench as it examines the legality of a Louisiana law that could force two of the state's three abortion clinics to shut down. Jillian Kitchener has more.

 

"The state has a significant and compelling interest in showing there's a safe environment. We can't rely on them to do it," Murrill said, referring to the clinics.

 

The Hope clinic has said implementation of the law would force it and another facility in Baton Rouge to shut, leaving a single clinic, located in New Orleans, for the entire state of about 4.6 million people. The state disputes that finding.

 

The Hope clinic, in a windowless brick building in Shreveport often with anti-abortion protesters outside, draws women not just from northwestern Louisiana but also eastern Texas and southern Arkansas.

 

Abortion remains one of the most divisive social issues in the United States, with Christian conservatives among those most opposed to it. A Supreme Court ruling in favor of Louisiana's law could lead other states to pass similar measures.

 

Abortion rights advocates have argued that restrictions such as admitting privileges are meant to limit access to abortion not protect women's health as proponents say.

 

Anti-abortion activists are hoping the Supreme Court, with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and perhaps additional Trump appointees on the bench if he wins re-election on Nov. 3, will scale back or even overturn Roe v. Wade.

 

Amanda Nottingham, an activist with the Louisiana Right to Life advocacy group that supports Louisiana's law, said the court is "far more favorable now than it was a few years ago."

 

"Obviously our goal is to see the end of abortion," Nottingham added.

 

Louisiana's law, Nottingham said, "makes a statement to the rest of the nation that Louisiana is pro-life and we are here to protect women, and we want the highest level of care and safety for them."

 

[For a graphic on U.S. state abortion laws, see tmsnrt.rs/2WZuiVP]

 

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-03-02

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

[Tug]

This issue will imo lose the election for trump don’t think the lady’s want to return to the Middle Ages big bo bo on trumps part

[BritManToo]

Abortion  rights are currently destroying our civilisation.

40% of fetus in the USA are aborted & contraception is so widespread our populations are shrinking drastically, if we allow this to continue only African, Asians and Arabs will be left in the world.

 

Is 'what women want' really so important that we should allow ourselves to become extinct?

Edited March 1, 2020 by BritManToo

[bkk6060]

The hypocrisy of people in the US.  Most saying this is a godless liberal ideal.

More then 70% of the women who get abortions claim they are Christian.

So, that is about 500,000 Christian abortions just last year.

What do the parents of a nice Catholic girl do when their private school child gets pregnant at 16?

 

Make it all illegal and watch all these desperate Christians running to Tijuana or some other country with their kids to take care of it.

 

I do agree with Britman that basically an entire generation has been killed off since Roe vs. Wade.

Close to 25 million abortions + I believe since that case.

But I believe the general thinking and blame on who is responsible is wrong.

Edited March 2, 2020 by bkk6060

[Curt1591]

7 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

But I believe the general thinking and blame on who is responsible is wrong.

I believe the blame lies on the irresponsible ...

[Puchaiyank]

Let's cut to the chase...abortion is being allowed to kill one's own off-spring.

 

Let's give "women-the-right" to kill their children at any age...what difference does it make if one's child is 1 minute old, 1 day or one year?

 

Even most animals protect their young at all cost...

 

Worst decision in American history was legalizing abortion...crushing the skulls of live babies...marketing baby parts like so many animal parts.

 

Women have the right to not get pregnant...not kill their own children...

[OneMoreFarang]

America, the land of the free. Or not? Poor people are obviously not allowed to make free decisions. 

The rich just travel a little - problem solved.

Make America Great (there is no Again) - Yeah, that would be a great idea.

[OneMoreFarang]

4 minutes ago, Puchaiyank said:

what difference does it make if one's child is 1 minute old, 1 day or one year?

It is THE difference. 

[spiekerjozef]

7 minutes ago, Puchaiyank said:

Women have the right to not get pregnant...not kill their own children...

...says the alpha male.

[Tug]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

Abortion  rights are currently destroying our civilisation.

40% of fetus in the USA are aborted & contraception is so widespread our populations are shrinking drastically, if we allow this to continue only African, Asians and Arabs will be left in the world.

 

Is 'what women want' really so important that we should allow ourselves to become extinct?

Wow don’t think the ones that carry the fetus to term would agree with you guys trying to take their right to choice in your view we need to raise more cannon fodder for the state nope don’t think the lady’s will play along and as of now they have the rite to vote lol

[Nyezhov]

Just now, Tug said:

Wow don’t think the ones that carry the fetus to term would agree with you guys trying to take their right to choice in your view we need to raise more cannon fodder for the state nope don’t think the lady’s will play along and as of now they have the rite to vote lol

So you are ok with killing a viable child becasue mommy doesnt want him or her?

[Chomper Higgot]

Abortions always have happened, always will happen, the only real choice is are women allowed professional medical abortions are are they going back to coat hangers and poisons.

[metisdead]

Troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

[RichardColeman]

Whilst I can agree with abortion for cases of rape and incest or violence perhaps, and in cases where there are severe growth issues, I personally find it sickening that a woman can just go and kill the offspring of not only her BUT her partner too. Men should have the ability to stop abortions in some cases. A woman can have a baby against a man's wishes, but a man cannot stop a woman's wishes. It takes two to create a life, but only one to murder it it seems

[Hanuman2547]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

40% of fetus in the USA are aborted & contraception is so widespread our populations are shrinking drastically, if we allow this to continue only African, Asians and Arabs will be left in the world.

Where are you getting this 40% of fetuses in the USA are aborted figure from?  I have seen nothing approaching that level except in some isolated cities or the District of Columbia.  

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

Abortion  rights are currently destroying our civilisation.

40% of fetus in the USA are aborted & contraception is so widespread our populations are shrinking drastically, if we allow this to continue only African, Asians and Arabs will be left in the world.

 

Is 'what women want' really so important that we should allow ourselves to become extinct?

So your concern is being out numbered by other races, sorry to break it to you, you already are.

 

Oh and, women, they don’t owe you any duty to make sure you don’t become extinct.

 

 

 

Edited March 2, 2020 by Chomper Higgot

[spiekerjozef]

11 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

So you are ok with killing a viable child becasue mommy doesnt want him or her?

Yes.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

Whilst I can agree with abortion for cases of rape and incest or violence perhaps, and in cases where there are severe growth issues, I personally find it sickening that a woman can just go and kill the offspring of not only her BUT her partner too. Men should have the ability to stop abortions in some cases. A woman can have a baby against a man's wishes, but a man cannot stop a woman's wishes. It takes two to create a life, but only one to murder it it seems

So you get a woman pregnant and all of a sudden you have dominion over her body.

 

Let’s keep it simple, we each are allowed dominion over our own bodies and you choose carefully who you want to have children with. 

 

If you don’t want women ’tricking’ you into becoming a father, use condoms or have a vasectomy.

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

19 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

So you are ok with killing a viable child becasue mommy doesnt want him or her?

Child?

[Chomper Higgot]

In a twist of religious thinking (so often twisted), many of the caring Christians campaigning against abortion rights also campaign against contraception and reproductive health education.

[Nyezhov]

11 minutes ago, spiekerjozef said:

Yes.

Thank you for your honesty. Do you support the death penalty too?

[spiekerjozef]

8 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Thank you for your honesty. Do you support the death penalty too?

Nope.

[Nyezhov]

1 minute ago, spiekerjozef said:

Nope.

Thanks, thats al we needed to know. Hypocrisy rules again.

 

 

[jesimps]

41 minutes ago, spiekerjozef said:

...says the alpha male.

Nothing to do with being male or female, more to do with whether or not to kill defenceless babies. How the question is even allowed to be asked is beyond me. I know what the babies would choose. Reminds me of what Reagan (I think) said "Everybody that's pro-abortion has already been born".

[spiekerjozef]

4 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Thanks, thats al we needed to know. Hypocrisy rules again.

 

 

embryo.....fetus......child.

[spiekerjozef]

3 minutes ago, jesimps said:

Nothing to do with being male or female, more to do with whether or not to kill defenceless babies. How the question is even allowed to be asked is beyond me. I know what the babies would choose. Reminds me of what Reagan (I think) said "Everybody that's pro-abortion has already been born".

embryo.....fetus......child.

[Nyezhov]

2 minutes ago, spiekerjozef said:

embryo.....fetus......child.

Got to love science deniers.

 

 

[RocketDog]

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Abortion  rights are currently destroying our civilisation.

40% of fetus in the USA are aborted & contraception is so widespread our populations are shrinking drastically, if we allow this to continue only African, Asians and Arabs will be left in the world.

 

Is 'what women want' really so important that we should allow ourselves to become extinct?

Wrong.

What's destroying civilization is a return to authoritarian rule, repression of personal rights, and widespread abuse of privacy. 

 

The only thing truly our own is our body. When the government has firm control of our bodies then the  core concept of freedom is dead and we are all simply farm animals. 

[Tug]

1 hour ago, Nyezhov said:

So you are ok with killing a viable child becasue mommy doesnt want him or her?

Nop dident say or imply that is an assumption on your part

[Chomper Higgot]

21 minutes ago, RocketDog said:

Wrong.

What's destroying civilization is a return to authoritarian rule, repression of personal rights, and widespread abuse of privacy. 

 

The only thing truly our own is our body. When the government has firm control of our bodies then the  core concept of freedom is dead and we are all simply farm animals. 

To be fair Britman isn’t proposing government ownership of our bodies, he’s advocating men having dominion over women’s bodies.