- comment
too conservative - body
- Hallelujah
- comment James E. Martin
- body
- I give it 3 weeks before a federal judge strikes it down as unconstitutional....
- comment Shaun Kenney
- body
- Which is precisely what pro-lifers want to happen...
Roe v. Wade has been on the ropes for years now. Yes, it'll be replaced by Planned Parenthood v. Casey, so abortion will remain legal. Still, the issue will be decided in state legislatures, which is a good thing.
- comment Ranger03
- body
- The wording of your last post was confusing. Roe has already been replaced by Casey. Casey, which reaffirmed the central holding of Roe (a right to abortion) still has a 5 vote majority on SCOTUS. Sadly, this bill will be shot down.
PS: Of course, it could take some time to reach the Supremes. By that point we could have another nominee. The question is, will it be a Miers or an Alito?
PPS: Virginia can't pass anything so long as Potts and Quayle sit on the Senate Ed and Health committee.
- comment Shaun Kenney
- body
- Has it? I thought one of the decisions on Casey explicitly argued in favor of state determination on the question of abortion?
So that if Roe v. Wade were struck down, PP v. Casey would still be the precedent, which would mean (a) abortion would be legal, but (b) only in places where the state legislatures would make it so.
Currently, while states can regulate abortion, they cannot ban abortion, as Roe v. Wade still prevails on the question.
Is this understanding correct?
- comment Ranger03
- body
- This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
- comment Ranger03
- body
- I think that understanding is flawed. A nutshell summary of Casey's impact on Roe is found here, in a paper by the inestimable Dr. Michael New. The relevant portion follows.
"[I]n 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court in Casey v. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania abandoned its trimester framework in favor of a doctrine of "undue burden." In so doing, the Court found constitutional some of the policies contained in Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act. While the Supreme Court did not overturn Roe v. Wade, the decision did give pro-life legislators at the state level more freedom to enact laws designed to protect the unborn."
Casey is the relevant precedent right now, and has been for the last 14 years. Because it affirms the central holding of Roe (the "freedom of women to choose abortion") it is properly seen as an evolution of Roe, but not a case that overturns Roe.
For the South Dakota law will be overturned because there are currently 5 judges that endorse Casey or an even more radical abortion jurisprudence: Breyer, Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Souter.
- comment Mark Gardner
- body
- The case will take time to get up to the supreme court, and the makeup of the court might be different by then.
8 Comments:
Roe v. Wade has been on the ropes for years now. Yes, it'll be replaced by Planned Parenthood v. Casey, so abortion will remain legal. Still, the issue will be decided in state legislatures, which is a good thing.
PS: Of course, it could take some time to reach the Supremes. By that point we could have another nominee. The question is, will it be a Miers or an Alito?
PPS: Virginia can't pass anything so long as Potts and Quayle sit on the Senate Ed and Health committee.
So that if Roe v. Wade were struck down, PP v. Casey would still be the precedent, which would mean (a) abortion would be legal, but (b) only in places where the state legislatures would make it so.
Currently, while states can regulate abortion, they cannot ban abortion, as Roe v. Wade still prevails on the question.
Is this understanding correct?
"[I]n 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court in Casey v. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania abandoned its trimester framework in favor of a doctrine of "undue burden." In so doing, the Court found constitutional some of the policies contained in Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act. While the Supreme Court did not overturn Roe v. Wade, the decision did give pro-life legislators at the state level more freedom to enact laws designed to protect the unborn."
Casey is the relevant precedent right now, and has been for the last 14 years. Because it affirms the central holding of Roe (the "freedom of women to choose abortion") it is properly seen as an evolution of Roe, but not a case that overturns Roe.
For the South Dakota law will be overturned because there are currently 5 judges that endorse Casey or an even more radical abortion jurisprudence: Breyer, Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Souter.
Post a Comment
Home