Roe v. Wade on trial: SCOTUS will hear challenge to Mississippi abortion ban at 15 weeks or later
New conservative slant to the Court could mean a reversal of the 48-year-old precedent that legalized abortion
The newest Justice, Amy Coney Barrett, will be the focus of upcoming abortion case before SCOTUS. A conservative Catholic appointed by President Trump and confirmed just days before the November election, Barrett is expected to tip the balance of the court toward restricting abortion. (Photo: Fox News Live)
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case involving a challenge to a Mississippi law prohibiting most abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy, a move that could have nationwide implications.
The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, revolves around a Mississippi law passed in 2018 that bans all abortions after 15 weeks “except in a medical emergency or in the case of a severe fetal abnormality.” The ban was blocked by lower courts who argued it violated previous Supreme Court rulings.
The case centers on whether states are permitted to ban abortions before a fetus can survive outside the womb and is seen as a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, a landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
The Supreme Court said they would specifically consider the broader question of whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional. Mississippi wants the court to reconsider the standards set in Roe v. Wade that only allow abortions to be prohibited after the fetus is considered viable — currently just under 21 weeks at Level 3 critical care NICUs — and allow abortions to be banned at an earlier point.
The court’s decision came after the justices — who have a 6-3 conservative tilt — had long hesitated on whether to take up the Mississippi law, repeatedly considering it at their conferences since October without issuing a decision on whether to take the case.
The Mississippi law was first passed in 2018 and was struck down by both a district and appeals court for going against the 1973 Supreme Court precedent that illogically assumed a constitutional right to an abortion before the fetus is viable. In Roe, the Supreme Court said viability (not humanity) occurs at 24 weeks gestational age. However, today’s medical advances have made it possible for much younger children to survive outside the womb.
Justice Harry Blackmun, the author of Roe, gave a very curious and illogical reason for determining that viability is the critical point in a mother’s pregnancy to protect the life of her child. He said it was at this stage that the child is “capable of meaningful life outside the womb.”
This is troubling indeed. According to Blackmun, human life cannot be protected by the law unless it is “meaningful.” Accordingly, unborn human life is not “meaningful” until the subjective state of its viability is achieved.
Then two-year-old Ellie Snyder and her mother were guests of President Donald Trump at his 2018 State of the Union Address. Ellie was born at Kansas City’s St. Luke’s Hospital at 21 weeks, four days. Under Roe v. Wade she could have been aborted as much as a month later. (Photo: Fox News Live)
Why should such a legal standard continue? If the life of a pre-viable unborn child is not “meaningful,” then what about the life of a handicapped newborn? What about the life of an adult who is rendered quadriplegic and cannot feed, dress, or sustain himself without assistance and artificial means?
In fact, are not the lives of all small children non-viable because none can feed themselves on their own but need assistance through artificial means, such as a bottle or utensils with the direction of a parent? What about those at the end of life who are bedridden and using artificial means to eat and breathe? What about CCP virus patients on ventilators?
Examples such as these are endless. The implications of using this standard to determine whether human life can be protected under the law are serious. This viability standard in the context of abortion has resulted in the deaths of millions of children.
The law in Mississippi acknowledges this dangerous standard of viability when determining issues of life and death. In short, Mississippi lawmakers chose to ignore the concept of viability in placing a ban on abortions after 15 weeks.
If the Supreme Court upholds the constitutional validity of this law, then states will be free to ban pre-viability abortions. However, the arbitrary limit of 15 weeks set by Mississippi will also become meaningless. A limit of 15 weeks to protect the unborn is just as subjective as the standard of viability. In short, the upholding of this law will free states to ban abortion from conception.
The current makeup of the Supreme Court includes six conservative justices — Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — who were each appointed by a conservative president known for his anti-abortion policies. Many court watchers believe that at least five of these will vote to uphold the Mississippi law.
If the Mississippi law is found constitutional, then the holding of Roe collapses. It will take its deserved place in the ash heaps of history along with Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson, cases that upheld slavery and institutional segregation.
We cannot change the past tragedies of our nation, which include the needless deaths of millions of unborn children. However, we can look to the future and protect the millions yet to be born. This is what the current cultural debate on abortion is all about.
Will America seize this opportunity to fulfill its promise to future generations that we stand for liberty and justice for all? This decision from the Supreme Court will answer this question and determine the destiny of the nation.