U.S. Supreme Court Hears Biggest Abortion Case in 25 Years on Wednesday, March 2
Religion News Service photo by Lauren Markoe On Wednesday, March 2 the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. In the 1973 the Roe v. Wade U.S. …More
Religion News Service photo by Lauren Markoe
On Wednesday, March 2 the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.
In the 1973 the Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court case that legalized abortion focused on the issue of privacy.
In 1992, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey focused on whether abortion restrictions were an, “undue burden” on women. An undue burden is defined as, “substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability.” In a 5-4 decision, Roe v. Wade was upheld but provisions were upheld for a 24 hour waiting period and in the case of a minor, parental consent.
In the 2007 Gonzales v. Carhart the ruling had the same focus as Planned Parenthood v. Casey and determined that laws against partial-birth abortion were not an undue burden.
This brings us to Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. Audio of the oral argument will be available at SCOTUSblog Wednesday. The …More
On Wednesday, March 2 the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.
In the 1973 the Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court case that legalized abortion focused on the issue of privacy.
In 1992, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey focused on whether abortion restrictions were an, “undue burden” on women. An undue burden is defined as, “substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability.” In a 5-4 decision, Roe v. Wade was upheld but provisions were upheld for a 24 hour waiting period and in the case of a minor, parental consent.
In the 2007 Gonzales v. Carhart the ruling had the same focus as Planned Parenthood v. Casey and determined that laws against partial-birth abortion were not an undue burden.
This brings us to Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. Audio of the oral argument will be available at SCOTUSblog Wednesday. The …More
- Report
Social media
Change post
Remove post
GloriaTV-Washington, D.C.
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
In this oral arguments update #5 is the very thing that happened to LeRoy Carhart's client, Jennifer Morbelli. The hospital couldn't reach him because he was on his way from Maryland back to Nebraska to start more abortions in Nebraska the next morning. This is the life of a 7-days-a-week abortion circuit-rider.
@Jungerheld: You are right. America has ended up with a guy like Trump. And the bad news: He may well be with a big distance the best of the candidates.
Jungerheld
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
@Abramo, could you be right? Not all have evolved to such a dangerous place, although I admit the downward spiral doesn't seem reversible. The SC did have its right place and, theoretically (?) could again. As for leaving things to our politicians, that isn't looking like much of a consolation. "We the people" are responsible for the celebrity status of one such as Trump. We don't have oppressive …More
@Abramo, could you be right? Not all have evolved to such a dangerous place, although I admit the downward spiral doesn't seem reversible. The SC did have its right place and, theoretically (?) could again. As for leaving things to our politicians, that isn't looking like much of a consolation. "We the people" are responsible for the celebrity status of one such as Trump. We don't have oppressive propaganda machines, only media that responds to our base instincts. We have some solid candidates, intelligent, thoughtful, and too many of us are more interested in the rude guy with the spray-on tan.
@Jungerheld: If the U.S. have "evolved" beyond the Constitution then it is ridiculous to have a Supreme Court. Let the politicians decide without Constitution.
Jungerheld
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
@Abramo, you've identified the importance in my thinking - some are committed to judging based on the Constitution and some seem to believe that we've "evolved" beyond the Constitution or that the Constitution is dead.