Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch asked the Supreme Court to overturn the landmark 1973 decision Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide, calling the ruling "egregiously wrong."
“Under the Constitution, may a State prohibit elective abortions before viability? Yes. Why? Because nothing in constitutional text, structure, history, or tradition supports a right to abortion," Fitch wrote in a brief filed to the court on Thursday.
The request pertains to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization involving a 2018 Mississippi law that would ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, with narrow exceptions for medical emergencies. The law was blocked in lower courts before it could take effect, and the Supreme Court announced in May it would take the case to decide “whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional."
Court precedent, first established with the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and reaffirmed in the 1992 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey decision, is that there is a right to legal abortion before the fetus reaches the gestational age at which it's likely to survive outside the womb. --->READ MORE HERE
 |
| Jonathan Ernst/Reuters |
Lynn Fitch, the attorney general of Mississippi, gets right to the point in the state’s legal brief in defense of its ban on abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation:
On a sound understanding of the Constitution, the answer to the question presented in this case is clear and the path to that answer is straight. Under the Constitution, may a State prohibit elective abortions before viability? Yes. Why? Because nothing in constitutional text, structure, history, or tradition supports a right to abortion. A prohibition on elective abortions is therefore constitutional if it satisfies the rational-basis review that applies to all laws.
The two obstacles in that path are Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood, which ignored text, structure, history — ignored the Constitution nearly completely — to pretend that abortion requires the federal courts to extend it special protection. Fitch and her colleagues explain patiently and thoroughly why those obstacles should be removed. The decisions were “egregiously wrong.” They have inflicted harm to self-government. They have not resulted in the stable consensus the Court has repeatedly sought and predicted. They have rested on premises about the reliability of contraception, the career prospects of women, and the state of medicine that no longer apply if they ever did. These outdated premises are at the heart of the Court’s previous findings about women’s “reliance” on constitutionalized abortion rights. --->READ MORE HEREFollow links below to related stories:
Roe v. Wade’s antiquated law of ‘viability’ deadly for unborn infants
Mississippi AG argues Supreme Court should reverse ‘wrong’ Roe v. Wade ruling
Mississippi AG Asks Supreme Court To Overturn Roe v. Wade
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.
No comments:
Post a Comment