Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

SCOTUS Will Hear Arguments on December 1 Over Mississippi Law Banning Most Abortions After 15 Weeks

SCOTUS Will Hear Arguments on December 1 Over Mississippi Law Banning Most Abortions After 15 Weeks

I’m hoping SCOTUS once again does not go with precedent as it did with the Texas pro-life law. It is time we follow the science when it comes to our most basic right: LIFE.

In May, the Supreme Court decided it would hear the challenge to Mississippi’s law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks.

SCOTUS announced on Monday it would hear the arguments on December 1:

The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, was already positioned to be one of the highest-profile arguments of the 2021-22 term, because the state had specifically asked the court to overrule its landmark decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, holding that the Constitution protects the right to have an abortion before the fetus can survive outside the womb. But the spotlight on the case became even more intense earlier this month, when the Supreme Court turned down a request to block the enforcement of a Texas law that prohibits abortions after the sixth week of pregnancy.

SCOTUS precedent does not allow states to ban abortion before viability, which is around 24 weeks.

Mississippi wants the justices to reexamine the accepted viability timeframe:

In the case, Mississippi is asking the justices to reexamine that viability standard. The state argued that the viability rule prevented states from adequately defending maternal health and potential life.

“It is well past time for the Court to revisit the wisdom of the viability bright-line rule,” Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch wrote in a brief filed with the justices.

I’m going to copy and paste what I wrote in May because it is so important.

Babies born at 22 or 23 weeks can survive with “experienced specialists in state-of-the-art NICUs.” It’s a slim chance, but a chance:

For babies born at 23 weeks or earlier who do survive, the odds of significant complications and/or lasting disabilities are much higher than for those that stay in the womb a few weeks longer.

A 2015 study showed that babies born at 22 weeks may also have a small chance at survival, but death or serious health issues have an even higher probability of occurring.

Also, note that according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, babies born before 23 weeks have a survival rate of just 5% to 6%. Of those that do survive, 98% to 100% have substantial complications and/or disability.

A pregnant woman can feel her baby move around 13-16 weeks. Around that time the movement feels more like a flutter, but she still feels the baby move. It becomes more pronounced around 20 weeks.

A pregnant woman can also find out the sex of her baby as early as 14 weeks. The ultrasound is generally taken between 18-21 weeks, but still, she can find out at 14 weeks. Maybe even earlier if she chooses to take the amino test to find out if the baby has any disorders.

More importantly, you can detect the baby’s heartbeat at six weeks via ultrasound.

Back in May, I expressed doubt SCOTUS would take any action even if it heard the arguments because they’ve always used precedent to back out of making any changes to Roe v Wade.

But then SCOTUS refused to halt the Texas pro-life law, which bans abortion after a viable heartbeat.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I do not trust the Supreme Court

    As noted in Subotai Bahadur’s comment, it’s not a matter of faith/trust, but rather secular certainty. While the legal precedent was set in the Twilight Amendment (“penumbras and emanations”, the rule of law and life aborted in darkness), it was normalized with the establishment of the Progressive Church/Synagogue/Corporation/University/Clinic’s Pro-Choice religion, a behavioral protocol, an alternate social contract.

    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to gonzotx. | September 21, 2021 at 6:30 am

    Roberts will rule that abortion is a tax, and therefore legal,,, or something.

    JHogan in reply to gonzotx. | September 21, 2021 at 12:52 pm

    SCOTUS proved they are cowards when the refused the election case brought by Texas and other states.

    There is absolutely no question the election laws in many states were changed unconstitutionally. To favor Dems. Zero. Zilch. None. Nada.

    And SCOTUS was too cowardly to do anything about it.

There is no mystery in sex and conception. A woman and man have four choices, not including the wicked solution (i.e. planned parent/hood a.k.a. selective-child). And, of course, the right of self-defense, where ideally the life of the mother and child are considered and reconciled.

    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to n.n. | September 21, 2021 at 8:37 am

    Newborn babies are not vaccinated, and upon birth become a threat to the vaccinated. Therefore, to protect the vaccinated, babies must be aborted…. or something.

    rhhardin in reply to n.n. | September 21, 2021 at 9:45 am

    “There is no mystery in sex and conception. ”

    It’s all mystery. The erotic works by putting itself into the light but not becoming an object. It depends on brain wiring – hey this ought to make sense but it doesn’t.

    That’s how a couple square inches of fur gets you in so much trouble. Genitals are responsible for almost all of the world’s troubles.

Slavery, diversity, and [elective] abortion are three dogmatic institutions and practices that civilized society should exclude with extreme prejudice.

find out if the baby has any disorders

It’s Her Choice. Should it be her Choice, too? Diversity, inequity, and exclusion is a progressive path and grade. I suppose democracy/dictatorship will have to decide who is eligible for selection (e.g. survival of the convenient, politically congruent (“=”)), including, but not limited to: Downs, trans/homos, trans/neos, boys, girls, etc.

Subotai Bahadur | September 20, 2021 at 11:25 pm

1) The Supreme Court fears the current regime and its supporters. They will do nothing.
2) I note the eviction moratorium, which the Court has twice ruled to be unconstitutional because the CDC cannot impose it, only Congress. After the second ruling, the current regime had the CDC renew and reimpose the eviction moratorium in direct defiance of the court rulings. I am sure that the Court has noted that and realize that the Executive Branch cannot be defied.

Subotai Bahadur

    Yes, the Constitution is not a viable social construct/contract to govern a democratic/dictatorial regime.

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to n.n. | September 21, 2021 at 9:02 am

      Without the goodwill and vigorous virtue of the people, there there shall be tyranny, no matter what any text derived from any source may otherwise direct.

Just what we need. A bunch of baby killers with their panties in a wad.

Perhaps, if their panties were wadded more often, they wouldn’t need to kill so many babies.

It’s not a viable heartbeat. There’s no heart, and nothing’s viable.

When a fetus is a human has a lot to do with when you want to protect it, indeed the causation goes the other way. It’s a human when you want to protect it.

It’s always human (i.e. not wolf) but not a human. If you want to get votes it’s that camp that you have to persuade, not fellow dogmatists.

When the Supreme Court overturns Roe (good) it goes back to the vote of the people, and that’s why you might want to worry about the vote of the people.

I’d go with the age where you can present the fetus as cute. Heartbeat (without a heart) is a little academic.

Marge Piercy has a famous poem “Right to Life” to show you what’s to be overcome. You might want to use cuteness.

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/culture_vultures/43802-anyone-like-to-discuss-this-poem-all-welcome

The original liberal logic was safe legal and Rare now you ant right up to birth. Nothing rare about that.

Follow the Science.

Progressives only want to follow science when it suits them.

IMO, SCOTUS could do worse from a political/policy standpoint than tossing Roe and returning to the states quo ante; Federalism. Push these sorts of ‘social/cultural’ issues back where they belong; the individual States. Each of which has it’s own culture, history, demographics, dominant religious tenets and social make-up. Some would ban abortion entirely, some would allow all abortion, most would be in the middle.

This removes the current winner take all problem of nationalizing every issue. It would reduce the stakes of winning or losing federal elections because there would be less importance for a SCOTUS potential appointment. This would allow the opportunity for tempers and division to cool a bit. Unfortunately, SCOTUS is unlikely to take this path. Though they would have far fewer contentious social, cultural issues brought before them and return them to their pre Roe role there is likely too much temporary heat for them to take.

Which means the winner take all mindset will continue. The d/progressive and scared because there are finally more r /conservatives running and getting elected because they at least are willing to get their hands just as dirty and be as ruthless as the d/progressive in achieving lasting results. See the election of DJT and his increased vote total in 2020 re-election campaign for a clue as the feeling of the r/conservative base on the matter.

That’s the choice for SCOTUS. Either fully embrace Federalism and let the individual States decide these issues or instead the Nation will shift wildly between the philosophy of Massachusetts to that of Mississippi as electoral fortunes shift.

This is a bit long but it is from the Mississippi law in question and makes a good case for allowing states to reduce the gestational age limit from the current viability standard. Especially if item 8 is accompanied by accurate visuals –

” 1. Between five (5) and six (6) weeks’ gestation, an unborn human being’s heart begins beating.

2. An unborn human being begins to move about in the womb at approximately eight (8) weeks’ gestation.

3. At nine (9) weeks’ gestation, all basic physiological functions are present. Teeth and eyes are present, as well as external genitalia.

4. An unborn human being’s vital organs begin to function at ten (10) weeks’ gestation. Hair, fingernails, and toenails also begin to form.

5. At eleven (11) weeks’ gestation, an unborn human being’s diaphragm is developing, and he or she may even hiccup. He or she is beginning to move about freely in the womb.

6. At twelve (12) weeks’ gestation, an unborn human being can open and close his or her fingers, starts to make sucking motions, and senses stimulation from the world outside the womb. Importantly, he or she has taken on “the human form” in all relevant aspects. Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124, 160 (2007).

7. The Supreme Court has long recognized that the State of Mississippi has an “important and legitimate interest in protecting the potentiality of human life,” Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 162 (1973), and specifically that “the state has an interest in protecting the life of the unborn.” Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 873 (1992).

8. The majority of abortion procedures performed after fifteen (15) weeks’ gestation are dilation and evacuation procedures which involve the use of surgical instruments to crush and tear the unborn child apart before removing the pieces of the dead child from the womb. The Legislature finds that the intentional commitment of such acts for nontherapeutic or elective reasons is a barbaric practice, dangerous for the maternal patient, and demeaning to the medical profession.”

Any abortion beyond the day that a fetus can survive on its own is murder!

Back in May, I expressed doubt SCOTUS would take any action even if it heard the arguments because they’ve always used precedent to back out of making any changes to Roe v Wade.

But then SCOTUS refused to halt the Texas pro-life law, which bans abortion after a viable heartbeat.

That shouldn’t affect your opinion. Even if the court had already decided to firmly turn down Dobbs, and uphold Roe and Casey, it still would not have been able to grant the injunction it was asked to in the Texas case, for the reasons it expressed. Those have nothing to do with the law’s validity. On the other hand, even if it had already decided to overturn Roe and Casey, it would probably still have enjoined the Texas law if it could.

As to what it will actually do in this case, I’m not quite as pessimistic as you. I think Kavanaugh will be a vote to uphold Casey, and therefore also Roe, but I think Barrett, Gorsuch, and maybe even Roberts are likely to vote for overturning them. Thomas and Alito are sure votes for overturn. So we may finally be looking at the beginning of the end.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend