The Texas law bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Obviously, that is unconstitutional as decided by Roe v. Wade. If the purpose in passing the law was to set up a legal challenge to Roe, it was poorly done. The law provided no exceptions for rape or incest. And enforcement of the law is left to private citizens, allowing anyone to sue another if that person "aids or abets" in an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. These private lawsuits could enrich the filer of the suit with up to $10,000 per abortion, plus legal costs. I do not like the idea of encouraging private citizens to turn on one another. This is America, not the USSR. (I am aware of laws that provide compensation to various whistleblowers. Generally, those laws are enforced against government agencies and government contractors, and big businesses.)
The Supreme Court refused to put a stay on enforcement of the Texas law. However, in the session that began yesterday, is a case out of Mississippi, where a law bans abortions after 15 weeks. If the Supreme Court is inclined to overturn Roe, the Mississippi case is cleaner.
The original decision in Roe was not based upon any Constitutional provision regarding "abortion" or the right to "privacy." Those words are not in the Constitution. Trying to guess the outcome of any Supreme Court case is always challenging, especially when the issue is so divisive and controversial. However, if I was to guess, it would be a 6 to 3 vote in favor of upholding Roe. Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan would definitely vote to uphold Roe. Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh probably would not. That leaves the CJ Roberts, Gorsuch and Barrett. My gut is that those three would be very reluctant to overturn a nearly 50 year old precedent.
And, if the Court can find a way to decide a case without ruling on the constitutionality of a law, they often prefer that type of limited decision. But we should know, no later than next June.
No comments:
Post a Comment