A second reason Alabama faces a strong headwind is that the law is quite blunt in asking the Supreme Court to overturn 46 years of legal precedent, beginning with Roe in and reaffirmed repeatedly.
But supporters of the state law are hoping that President Donald Trump's newest appointment to the court, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, changed the court's fundamental arithmetic. He replaced Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted to reaffirm Roe.
Added to Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, that brings to four the number of potential votes to overturn the landmark decision. But it takes five votes to achieve such a ruling, and there's no guarantee Chief Justice John Roberts would provide it, given his interest in the court's long-term legacy.
Lies, Damn Lies, and Abortion
Even so, the court's liberals suggested this week that they are concerned about that prospect. They dissented Monday when the court struck down a year-old precedent involving lawsuits against the states. Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for himself and for Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, said it is dangerous for the court "to overrule a decision only because five members of a later court come to agree with earlier dissenters on a difficult legal question. Breyer said "the law can retain the necessary stability only if this court resists that temptation," and one of the factors often cited in deciding whether to overturn precedent is how much the nation has relied upon an earlier ruling.
Abortion Politics in the Federal Courts Right Versus Right by Yarnold & Barbara M.
Harvard Law School professor Laurence Tribe, one of the nation's leading constitutional experts, says overruling Roe and the follow-on case upholding it, Planned Parenthood v. Casey , "would upset much deeper and broader societal reliance interests" than those at issue in this week's case about suing the states. But Ian Millhiser of the Center for American Progress, a liberal advocacy group, says, "With all respect to Professor Tribe, now is the time for supporters of reproductive rights to panic. Two such laws are now pending before the Supreme Court, waiting for the justices to decide whether to review them.
One is a challenge to a Louisiana law that would require any doctor offering abortion services to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.
Abortion Politics in the Federal Courts: Right Versus Right
It is virtually identical to a Texas law the Supreme Court struck down in A second pending case involves an Indiana law, signed by then-governor and now Vice President Mike Pence, that prohibited what the state called discriminatory abortions, those sought because of characteristics of the fetus, including gender, race or diagnosis of Down syndrome or other defect. If the departure of Kennedy changes the balance and results in the court upholding either of those laws, it would represent a further restriction on abortion without overturning Roe v.
Wade, and without a ruling on the law passed by Alabama that is so clearly addressed to the Supreme Court. But there very likely are enough votes to consider a less aggressive statute and narrow Roe.
The Supreme Court just announced it will hear the first big abortion case of the Kavanaugh era
Impeachment Inquiry Democratic Debate U. Sections U. Check for new and used marketplace copies. In this analysis of federal court cases relying upon the landmark Roe v.
Wade decision, the author finds that the pro-life movement in the United States has suffered repeated losses in abortion litigation. Additionally, her research indicates that, despite claims to the contrary, the pro-life movement is a loose collection of underfunded and understaffed public interest organizations. The pro-choice forces are vastly more powerful in abortion litigation, have superior organization and financing, and include not only public interest groups but also private interests such as clinics and professional medical organizations. Divided into three parts, the study begins with a public law analysis of the progeny of Roe cases, examining those variables which appear to impact court decisions.
Next the work examines political factors and litigation resources as variables in explaining court decisions. And finally, the work offers a descriptive analysis of abortion litigants which divides the groups into major categories and evaluates them in terms of their resources, longevity, and other such factors. This book will be of interest to those seriously interested in the political and legal ramifications of the abortion controversy.
Skip Navigation and go to main content Bestsellers Books. Print this page.