|
 The court on Sept. 1 declined to halt the law
https://www.reuters.com/
business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/texas-six-week-abortion-ban-takes-effect-2021-09-01
in a 5-4 decision with all but one of its six conservative justices
in the majority. During three hours of oral arguments on Monday, at
least two of the justices who had allowed the law to be enforced -
Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett - appeared to lean toward
permitting abortion providers to proceed with their legal challenge.
The court's conservatives seemed more skeptical about whether to let
Democratic President Joe Biden's administration pursue its own
challenge. The Justice Department sued Texas in September seeking to
block the Republican-backed law.
The administration and abortion providers have said the law violates
a woman's constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy recognized
in the court's landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling and is impermissibly
designed to evade federal judicial review.
The law imposes the nation's toughest abortion restrictions, banning
it after about six weeks of pregnancy - a time when many women do
not realize they are pregnant - with no exceptions for pregnancies
resulting from incest or rape. It is one of a wave of
Republican-backed state abortion laws in recent years. Abortion
opponents hope the court's 6-3 conservative majority will pare back
abortion rights or even overturn Roe v. Wade.
Some justices signaled that existing Supreme Court precedent could
accommodate the lawsuit by the abortion providers despite the law's
novel design that makes it difficult for federal courts to block it.
The law lets private citizens rather than state officials enforce it
through lawsuits against providers and others who assist a woman in
obtaining an abortion.
Depending on what approach the justices take, they could block the
law entirely or pave the way for a lower court judge to do so. If
the justices keep federal courts out of the process by virtue of the
law's design, it could be replicated in various other states seeking
to curtail abortion access.
U.S. abortion rights are hanging in the balance as the justices
review the Texas law before hearing arguments on Dec. 1
https://www.reuters.com/article/
legal-us-usa-court-abortion-instant/u-s-supreme-court-takes-up-case-that-could-limit-abortion-rights-idUSKCN2CY1P9
over the legality of a Mississippi measure, blocked by lower courts,
prohibiting the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy.
'FULLY AIRED'
Barrett asked clinic lawyer Marc Hearron about whether under the
law's structure the constitutional claims on the right to abortion
could ever be "fully aired." Under the law, abortion providers can
bring up that constitutional issue as a defense only after they have
been sued.
Kavanaugh expressed interest in an outcome raised by liberal Justice
Elena Kagan in which state court clerks would be barred from
allowing lawsuits brought by private individuals seeking to enforce
the law to proceed while litigation over the legality of the measure
unfolds.
[to top of second column] |
 Kavanaugh wondered if states could pass similar
laws https://www.reuters.com/world/us/texas-abortion-law-critics-warn-conservatives-unintended-consequences-2021-10-31
infringing on other constitutional rights
including gun rights. A state, for example,
could allow for $1 million in damages against
anyone who sells an AR-15 rifle, he said.
Kavanaugh also wondered about closing a loophole
"exploited" by the Texas measure in the court's
precedents concerning when state officials can
be barred from enforcing unconstitutional laws.
His tone was more skeptical toward the Biden
administration lawsuit, telling U.S. Solicitor
General Elizabeth Prelogar that challenge was
"different and irregular and unusual."
Kagan said the law was written by "some
geniuses" to evade the broad legal principle
that "states are not to nullify federal
constitutional rights." Kagan warned of the
consequences of states passing laws that
infringe upon rights, including same-sex
marriage and religious liberty.
The Texas measure enables private citizens to
sue anyone who performs or assists a woman in
getting an abortion after cardiac activity is
detected in the embryo. That feature made it
more difficult to directly sue the state.
Individual citizens can be awarded a minimum of
$10,000 for bringing successful lawsuits under
the law. Biden's administration has called it a
"bounty."
Conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel
Alito asked whether anyone would have standing
to sue under the law without having a direct
injury. Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone,
defending the law, said personal "outrage"
toward abortion would be enough to justify a
lawsuit.
The law has deterred abortion providers facing
innumerable potentially costly lawsuits in Texas
- the second most-populous U.S. state behind
only California, with about 29 million people.
The court agreed to take up https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-hear-challenge-texas-abortion-ban-2021-10-22
the matter on Oct. 22, bypassing lower courts
considering the challenges.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley
in Washington; Additional reporting by Jan
Wolfe; Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2021 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2021 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content
 |
