Supreme Court to hear landmark abortion case this week

[mystery-ak]

Supreme Court to hear landmark abortion case this week
By John Kruzel - 11/29/21 06:00 AM EST

The justices will hear arguments Wednesday over a Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks in a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.

The case poses the clearest test yet of the 6-3 conservative court’s trajectory.

Conservatives and anti-abortion activists have since 1973 sought to narrow or overturn the legal right to an abortion first recognized in the Roe decision. They hope the upcoming Mississippi case finally leads to its dismantling.
ADVERTISEMENT

The state's Republican attorney general, in a court brief filed over the summer, explicitly urged the justices to overrule Roe and related rulings, calling the court’s precedent on abortion “egregiously wrong.”

“This Court should overrule Roe and Casey,” Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch (R) wrote, referring also to the court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. “Roe and Casey are egregiously wrong. They have proven hopelessly unworkable. ... And nothing but a full break from those cases can stem the harms they have caused.”

more
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/583072-supreme-court-to-hear-landmark-abortion-case-this-week

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://rumble.com/embed/vnf8mq/?pub=4

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1466025816639348746

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1466022251631890432

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/nypost/status/1466029856836231170

[Right_in_Virginia]

Jack Posobiec
@Jack Posobiec

So you feel Roe v Wade is constitutional, do you?




11:22 AM · Dec 1, 2021·Twitter Web App

[Right_in_Virginia]

Jack Posobiec
@Jack Posobiec

Thomas is reeling them in now

He's asking them to tell him where any of this is written in the Constitution

Abortion Beckys are flailing about

They know there is no textual basis for Roe v Wade


11:29 AM · Dec 1, 2021·Twitter Web App

[Right_in_Virginia]

Jack Posobiec
@Jack Posobiec

Thomas is drilling down

"What is the constitutional right to abortion?"


11:14 AM · Dec 1, 2021·Twitter Web App

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1466076907330490375

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://youtu.be/MRe4mYcEqBM

[Right_in_Virginia]

Breaking911
@Breaking911

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Evidence of fetal pain is not proof of life


11:22 AM · Dec 1, 2021·TweetDeck

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/RyanTAnd/status/1466065110678573060

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1466063265151213572

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1466086241187897349

[libertybele]

A decision likely in the Spring?? That's a long ways off especially since the arguments have ended.  Why the wait??

Supreme Court oral arguments end in critical Mississippi abortion case

Oral arguments in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ended shortly before noon Wednesday after nearly two hours of arguments.

Many believe the case is the most important abortion litigation in the last 40 years.

The fate of the case -- and the Roe v. Wade abortion precedent -- now rests in the hands of the court's nine justices.

A decision will likely come sometime in the spring.

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1466070870775017479

[Right_in_Virginia]

Mollie
@MZHemingway
·
19m

Totally apart from politics and law, a quick message for younger women: It is a disgusting and violent lie to assert, as some do, that you have to be able to kill your children to have a fulfilling life as a woman. Violence against children is *never* necessary or good.

[mystery-ak]

Kagan: Abortion ‘Part of the Fabric of Women’s Existence in This Country’

Joel B. Pollak 1 Dec 2021

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said Wednesday that abortion is “part of the fabric of women’s existence in this country” as she tried to defend the 1973 Roe v. Wade precedent in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Heath Orgnization case.

Kagan took a firm line with Mississippi Solicitor General Scott G. Stewart, who appeared during oral arguments at the Court to defend Mississippi’s controversial 2018 law banning abortion, including in cases of rape and incest, before 15 weeks of pregnancy.

She said that the Court needed to avoid the perception that it was merely a political body (without acknowledging that Roe itself had created that expectation), and argued that not much had changed since Roe and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) to change the principles at stake.

In response, Stewart said that if nothing, in fact, had changed, that was a point against Roe and Casey, because they “have no basis in the Constitution.”

more
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/12/01/kagan-abortion-part-of-the-fabric-of-womens-existence-in-this-country/

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1466101357081993216

[Bigun]

In response, Stewart said that if nothing, in fact, had changed, that was a point against Roe and Casey, because they “have no basis in the Constitution.”

Mr. Stewart is 100% correct! Not one iota!

[mountaineer]

The director of Students for Life posted on FB:

Kristan Mercer Hawkins
39m  ·
What I learned listening to the Supreme Court oral arguments today:
-My 12 year old has more biology knowledge than Justice Sotomayor. Truly, it’s shocking.
-The pro-abortion side proved in their own arguments that contraception doesn’t end the need for abortion.
-The abortion industry truly doesn’t believe women are strong enough to carry their child to term and achieve their life goals.
-Justice Alito, Thomas, Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch are first class. Truly, it was fun to listen to their questioning.
-Any person who says they are pro-life but voted or worked against the election of an anti-abortion President or U.S. Senator should never be allowed to use that label again. As today proved, voting #prolifefirst matters. We are here because of President Bush and Trump and the Senators who confirmed their pro-life nominees.

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/WashTimes/status/1466214430988025861

[Elderberry]

SCOTUS Appears to Seek Middle Ground on Abortion After Hearing Mississippi Abortion Oral Arguments

Legal Insurrection by  Mary Chastain 12/1/2021

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/12/scotus-appear-to-seek-middle-ground-on-abortion-after-hearing-mississippi-abortion-oral-arguments/

We will likely get a decision in the spring.

Mississippi wants to ban abortion after 15 weeks.

Roe v. Wade in 1973 and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992 said states could not ban abortion before a baby’s viability. Right now, that is 22 to 24 weeks.

Lawyer Jonathan Turley found it “striking” that the “pro-choice side did not offer alternatives if the Court were to drop the emphasis on viability.”

Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Severino praised SCOTUS for “articulating its constitutional role: not to pick winners and losers on divide issues like abortion, but to remain ‘scrupulously neutral,’ as Justice Kavanaugh said.”

I agree with Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog. Justices Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito appear to want to overturn Roe. Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to lean toward upholding the Mississippi law and not overturning Roe.

More ar link.

[Hoodat]

Justice Thomas: 'What Specifically Is the Right Here That We're Talking About?'

Susan Jones  |  December 1, 2021  |  12:11pm EST

(CNSNews.com) - The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in Dobbs v. Jackson, a case challenging the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued against the Mississippi law, saying the Supreme Court, in Roe v. Wade, "correctly recognized that the Constitution protects a woman's fundamental right to decide whether to end a pregnancy before viability.”

She concluded, “If this court renounces the liberty interest recognized in Roe and reaffirmed in Casey, it would be an unprecedented contraction of individual rights and a stark departure from principles of stare decisis," she said. "The court has never revoked a right that is so fundamental to so many Americans and sos central to their ability to participate fully and equally in society. The court should not overrule this central component of women's liberty."

Justice Clarence Thomas pressed Prelogar on what the specific "right" is that she's defending: "Is it specifically abortion? Is it liberty? Is it autonomy? Is it privacy?" Thomas asked.

"The right is grounded in the liberty component of the 14th Amendment, Justice Thomas," Prelogar said. "But I think that it promotes interest in autonomy, bodily integrity, liberty and equality. And I do think that it is specifically the right to abortion here, the right of a woman to be able to control without the state forcing her to continue a pregnancy, whether to carry that baby to term."

Thomas responded: "I understand we're talking about abortion here. But what is confusing is that we -- if we were talking about the 2nd Amendment, I know exactly what we're talking about. If we're talking about the 4th Amendment, I know what we're talking about, because it's written, it's there. What specifically is the right here that we're talking about?" Thomas asked again:  .  .  .

https://www.cnsnews.com/article/national/susan-jones/justice-thomas-what-specifically-right-here-were-talking-about


The only 'right' at issue here is the right of the Great State of Mississippi to formulate its own abortion laws.  There is an amendment that directly addresses that - Amendment X.  And from Justice Thomas' questioning, it is clear that plaintiff can show nothing in the Constitution that upholds an abortion right.

[Bigun]

Justice Thomas: 'What Specifically Is the Right Here That We're Talking About?'

Susan Jones  |  December 1, 2021  |  12:11pm EST

(CNSNews.com) - The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in Dobbs v. Jackson, a case challenging the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued against the Mississippi law, saying the Supreme Court, in Roe v. Wade, "correctly recognized that the Constitution protects a woman's fundamental right to decide whether to end a pregnancy before viability.”

She concluded, “If this court renounces the liberty interest recognized in Roe and reaffirmed in Casey, it would be an unprecedented contraction of individual rights and a stark departure from principles of stare decisis," she said. "The court has never revoked a right that is so fundamental to so many Americans and sos central to their ability to participate fully and equally in society. The court should not overrule this central component of women's liberty."

Justice Clarence Thomas pressed Prelogar on what the specific "right" is that she's defending: "Is it specifically abortion? Is it liberty? Is it autonomy? Is it privacy?" Thomas asked.

"The right is grounded in the liberty component of the 14th Amendment, Justice Thomas," Prelogar said. "But I think that it promotes interest in autonomy, bodily integrity, liberty and equality. And I do think that it is specifically the right to abortion here, the right of a woman to be able to control without the state forcing her to continue a pregnancy, whether to carry that baby to term."

Thomas responded: "I understand we're talking about abortion here. But what is confusing is that we -- if we were talking about the 2nd Amendment, I know exactly what we're talking about. If we're talking about the 4th Amendment, I know what we're talking about, because it's written, it's there. What specifically is the right here that we're talking about?" Thomas asked again:  .  .  .

https://www.cnsnews.com/article/national/susan-jones/justice-thomas-what-specifically-right-here-were-talking-about


The only 'right' at issue here is the right of the Great State of Mississippi to formulate its own abortion laws.  There is an amendment that directly addresses that - Amendment X.  And from Justice Thomas' questioning, it is clear that plaintiff can show nothing in the Constitution that upholds an abortion right.

And there is NO right more fundamental than the right to life!