The Supreme Court does not stop the controversial abortion law in Texas. Abortion clinics, on the other hand, have the right to take action against the law in court, according to Friday’s announcement, which could lead to the law being banned in a lower degree.
But the nine justices of the Supreme Court are moving in different directions. Governor Clarence Thomas opposes the decision to allow a lawsuit to be filed in Texas. On the contrary, the three Liberal Justices and Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized that the trial should take place as quickly as possible. Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a special statement to the Three Liberals that the Supreme Court should have halted the Texas law, which she called “that crazy,” before it could go into effect.
Clearly, there are deep cracks in the court. CNN analyst Joan Peskopic called Friday’s decision a “glimpse” of what’s to come, when the Supreme Court next year provides more comprehensive information about how it views abortion law in the United States. It can be said that flash flash still contains many conflicting signals.
The controversial law In Texas, in practice, there is a ban on the termination of pregnancy from the time when cardiac activity can be detected on an ultrasound, that is, after the sixth week. It is one of a series of examples of how individual states in the United States are attempting to repeal the right to abortion in the United States—despite the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade, which was handed down in 1973 and considered a guarantor of abortion. A free abortion so that the fetus can be considered viable.
The special thing about the law in Texas is that it gives citizens the right to sue a person who helps a woman have an abortion (hypothetically, a taxi driver could be brought to justice because he or she transported a pregnant woman to an abortion clinic). The Supreme Court had the option of blocking the Texas law when it went into effect in September. Instead, the court gave the green light to the law, specifically regarding legal artistic design.
Even in September, the court was divided. And just as on Friday, Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the three Liberal members.
At the same time it is happening now A major trial of the Mississippi abortion law, which means it is forbidden to terminate a pregnancy after the fifteenth week. Last week, the court held an open hearing, in which John Roberts indicated he was trying to find a compromise.
The big question is whether it is even possible to compromise – and somehow reduce the time limit – without reversing the decision in the Roe v. Wade.
Because if the 1973 ruling was overturned, states could take over the power to legalize abortion. The chances of terminating a pregnancy will then vary greatly in the United States. According to the Guttmacher Institute It can ban abortion in up to 26 states.
Majority in the Supreme Court Consistently conservative, Donald Trump has been given the opportunity to nominate at least three members during his four years as president. In Senate hearings before the appointments, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Connie Barrett lobbied hard for Roe’s attitude toward Wade. Republican Senator Susan Min, who is behind pregnant women’s suffrage, said she has received assurances from Kavanaugh that he considers the 1973 resolution part of the law.
At his Mississippi law hearing last week, Kavanaugh on the contrary indicated that he wanted the Supreme Court to be “impartial” regarding abortions. Such “neutrality” in the Constitution would, in effect, pave the way for bans in large parts of the United States.
Liberal Sonia Sotomayor, who warns against insanity, also wondered how the Supreme Court would escape “stench” as an institution, if politics prevailed over the law.
“Falls down a lot. Internet fanatic. Proud analyst. Creator. Wannabe music lover. Introvert. Tv aficionado.”