US Supreme Court set to overturn ruling that legalised abortion

The US Supreme Court looks set to overturn a landmark ruling that effectively legalised abortions across America, handing the power to decide whether or not to permit the procedure back to individual states.  

A draft legal opinion, which was leaked to Politico, reveals a majority of the court’s nine judges are in agreement on the issue which would be enough to force a change in the law – though their decision is not final until the ruling is officially published.

In the document, Justice Samuel Alito writes that Roe v Wade – the 1973 Supreme Court ruling which found that excessive state regulation of abortion is unconstitutional – was ‘egregiously wrong from the start’ and ‘must be overruled’.

If the ruling is overturned, it would give individual states the power to decide on whether to ban abortion. The Guttmacher Institute, a pro-choice research group, has said that 26 states are ‘certain or likely’ to ban abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned. 

Alito, who was nominated to the court in 2006 by George W Bush, also takes aim at another 1992 case – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – which upheld Roe’s findings.

He argues that Roe’s ‘reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. Far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.’

But there were few signs that the new ruling will do anything to heal those divisions, with protesters gathering outside the court in Washington DC last night.

Politico reports that, aside from Alito, four other judges voted in favour of overturning the law: Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, all of whom were nominated by Republican presidents.

Partisan fighting over the issue began almost immediately, with Democrats vowing to defend abortion rights while Republicans demanded a probe into the leak. 

If the leak proves to be genuine – and the Supreme Court has not denied that it is – it would mark the first time that a draft opinion has ever appeared in public before being officially published, a move expected within the next two months.

 A decision in the case had been expected before the court begins its summer recess in late June or early July, so it could be more than a month before the court actually issues a final opinion. If the court does what the draft suggests, the ruling would upend a nearly 50-year-old decision; its advance publication would also disturb an almost unbroken tradition of secrecy at the court. 

A spokesperson for the Supreme Court said: ‘The Court has no comment.’ 

Politico executive editor Dafna Linzer sent a note to staff after the story posted, expressing confidence in the story and their verification of the draft opinion.

‘After an extensive review process, we are confident of the authenticity of the draft. … We take our responsibilities to our readers with the greatest seriousness,’ she noted. 

Politico posted the entire draft opinion online. 

If Alito decision is adopted, it would return the issue of abortions to the states and over half are likely to ban abortion.

Numerous Republican-led states have passed various abortion restrictions in defiance of the Roe precedent in recent years.

Republicans could try to enact a nationwide abortion ban, while Democrats could also seek to protect abortion rights at the national level.

Twenty-six states are certain or likely to ban abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned, according to the pro-abortion rights think tank the Guttmacher Institute.

Of those, 22 states already have total or near-total bans on the books that are currently blocked by Roe, aside from Texas.

The state’s law banning it after six weeks has already been allowed to go into effect by the Supreme Court due to its unusual civil enforcement structure. Four more states are considered likely to quickly pass bans if Roe is overturned.

Sixteen states and the District of Columbia, meanwhile, have protected access to abortion in state law.

This year, anticipating a decision overturning or gutting Roe, eight conservative states have already moved to restrict abortion rights.

Oklahoma, for example, passed several bills in recent weeks, including one that goes into effect this summer making it a felony to perform an abortion.

Politico reports that four of the five remaining Republican-appointed justices voted with Alito in December, after hearing oral arguments on a Mississippi abortion case. And that line-up remains unchanged as of this week.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett all voted to strike down Roe. 

 Democrat-appointed justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are working on dissents. 

It is not clear how Chief Justice John Roberts, nominated by W Bush, voted – though the fact that he did not pen the majority opinion could suggest he voted against. Sources told CNN that he would’ve dissented with the liberals on Alito’s opinion draft. 

But if the justices stand firm, it would not matter how Roberts votes as five back the Alito draft opinion.

Draft opinions can change and the ruling will not be final until it is published.

If the Alito draft is adopted, it would rule in favor of Mississippi in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization – a case involving the state’s  attempt to ban most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. 

The draft opinion runs 98 pages, including a 31-page appendix of historical state abortion laws, Politico notes in its report. The document is replete with citations to previous court decisions, books and other authorities, and includes 118 footnotes. The appearances and timing of this draft are consistent with court practice. 

Politico said only that it received ‘a copy of the draft opinion from a person familiar with the court´s proceedings in the Mississippi case along with other details supporting the authenticity of the document.’ 

Katyal described how the Supreme Court handles its decision making process.

‘After oral argument the Justices take a tentative vote. This would have happened in December. The senior most justice in the majority gets to assign the opinion. That might have been Roberts, but doubtful since Alito wrote this draft,’ he noted on Twitter.

‘Now, once the draft is circulated, the justices in dissent will write an opinion. That’s presumably happening now. But the tenative vote seems strong, and Chief Justice Roberts is irrelevant if the 4 + Alito hold with their tentative votes,’ he added. 

The unprecedented leak has likely shaken the Supreme Court to its core. 

Barricades were being posted around the building shortly after the report was posted online. Posts to social media showed people gathering at the metal fencing, holding candles in vigil. 

The hightly-respected SCOTUSblog, which covers the court in-depth, noted: ‘The document leaked to Politico is almost certainly an authentic draft opinion by J. Alito that reflects what he believes at least 5 members of the Court have voted to support — overruling Roe. But as Alito’s draft, it does not reflect the comments or reactions of other Justices.’

‘It’s impossible to overstate the earthquake this will cause inside the Court, in terms of the destruction of trust among the Justices and staff. This leak is the gravest, most unforgivable sin,’ SCOTUSblog tweeted. 

Other observers called it a crisis for Roberts’ tenure as chief justice.

‘The article represents the greatest crisis that Chief Justice John Roberts has faced in his tenure on the Court,’ wrote legal scholar Jonathan Turley.

Turley also pointed out the leak happened to put pressure on the court to change its ruling before it’s publicly announced. 

‘The most likely motivation is obviously to pressure the Court and push the legislation in Congress on a federal abortion law before the midterm elections. It will also likely renew the call for court packing,’ he added. 

And Democratic campaign stratgist Brian Fallon tweeted: ‘Is a brave clerk taking this unpredecented step of leaking a draft opinion to warn the country what’s coming in a last-ditch Hail Mary attempt to see if the public response might cause the Court to reconsider?’ 

Such a ruling would immediately become an issue in the 2022 midterm election where Democrats are struggling to keep control of Congress. 

Abortion would also become a major political issue in governors’ races with states being given the right to determine whether or not to allow the procedure.  

Both sides of the political aisle immediately jumped on the report with Democrats outraged and Republicans praising the news.

‘Abortion care is a fundamental human right and we must legislation like it,’ wrote progressive Rep.. Ayanna Pressly of Massachusetts on Twitter. 

‘This is bulls***,’ wrote Democratic Senator Tina Smith of Minnesota on Twitter.  

‘Our daughters, sisters, mothers, and grandmothers will not be silenced. The world is about to hear their fury. California will not sit back. We are going to fight like hell,’ wrote Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom of California. 

‘The Supreme Court is preparing to overturn Roe – the most significant and glorious news of our lifetime. Join me in praying to God for the right outcome. Life begins at conception. Let’s protect it,’ tweeted conservative Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.

Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida claimed the leak was done to influence the ruling.

‘The next time you hear the far left preaching about how they are fighting to preserve our Republic’s institutions & norms remember how they leaked a Supreme Court opinion in an attempt to intimidate the justices on abortion,’ he wrote on Twitter. 

And Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas called for an investigation of the leak.

‘The Supreme Court & the DOJ must get to the bottom of this leak immediately using every investigative tool necessary,’ he tweeted.  

The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, in September, passed legislation that would codify abortion rights protections amid threats to Roe v. Wade.

That bill has been stalled in the 50-50 Senate, where it needs at least 60 votes to move forward. And it may need more than that as not all Democratic senators are guaranteed to vote for such a bill, particularly moderate Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

Progressive Senator Bernie Sanders said that 60-vote thresh hold, often called the filibuster, must be removed to legalize abortion.

‘Congress must pass legislation that codifies Roe v. Wade as the law of the land in this country NOW. And if there aren’t 60 votes in the Senate to do it, and there are not, we must end the filibuster to pass it with 50 votes,’ he tweeted on Monday night. 

Democrats SLAM Supreme Court’s draft decision overturning Roe v. Wade – as Republicans celebrate 

Following the news that Justice Samuel Alito penned a draft opinion in February repudiating both Roe vs. Wade and the 1992 Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision, prominent Democrats have vowed to fight it.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders demanded Congress pass legislation that codifies abortion rights into law – and potentially end the filibuster to pass that bill, while Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren branded the Supreme Court as ‘extremist.’

Several Democratic governors, like New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, also vowed to protect abortion rights in their state, with Hochul writing: ‘I refuse to let my new granddaughter have to fight for the rights that generations have fought for and won.’

Meanwhile, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy dubbed it a ‘truly dark day in America,’ and California Gov. Gavin Newsom vowed to ‘fight like hell.

‘Our daughters, sisters, mothers and grandmothers will not be silenced,’ he tweeted.

Feminist attorney Gloria Allred wrote: ‘If the leaked draft opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade becomes the final opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, then countless women and girls will die or be maimed from illegal, unsafe abortions. Urge SCOTUS to support Roe v. Wade and stop endangering women.’

Republicans, though, seemed excited by the news – but still remained wary of the decision to leak the draft decision.

Sen. Josh Hawley wrote that the leak of Alito’s decision was ‘an unprecedented breach of confidentiality, clearly meant to intimidate.

‘The Justices mustn’t give in to this attempt to corrupt the process,’ he wrote, urging them to ‘stay strong.’

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio also questioned the motives behind the leak, writing Monday night: ‘The next time you hear the far left preaching about how they are fighting to preserve our Republic’s institutions and norms, remember how they leaked a Supreme Court opinion in an attempt to intimidate.’

And controversial North Carolina Rep. Madison Cawthorn asked for prayers for the end of Roe v. Wade, writing: ‘Evil MUST not triumph.

‘Science, common sense and LIFE will win.’ 

Roe vs Wade: The Texas mother who won the landmark 1973 case but then became a fierce opponent of abortion rights – and her ‘Roe Baby’ daughter who finally revealed her identity last year

ByStephen M. Lepore For Dailymail.Com

The Supreme Court has voted to strike down Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion in the United States, a bombshell report revealed on Monday.

The history of the legislation, which has proved controversial since it was made in 1973, dates back half a century.

The case was filed in 1971 by Norma McCorvey, a 22-year-old living in Texas who was unmarried and seeking a termination of her unwanted pregnancy. 

She married at the age of 16, but separated shortly after while she was pregnant. She gave custody of her daughter to her mother. 

She gave a second child up for adoption, but when she got pregnant a third time she decided to have an abortion. 

She said she couldn’t afford to travel to one of the handful of states where it would have been legal.

Because of state legislation preventing abortions unless the mother’s life is at risk, she was unable to undergo the procedure in a safe and legal environment.

So McCorvey sued Henry Wade, the Dallas county district attorney, in 1970. The case went on to the Supreme Court, under the filing Roe vs Wade, to protect McCorvey’s privacy.

Sarah Weddington and  a former classmate, Linda Coffee, brought a class-action lawsuit on behalf of a pregnant woman challenging a state law that largely banned abortions.

She had been among only five women out of a class of 1,600 to graduate with a law degree from the University of Texas in 1967.

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion in Roe v. Wade. The landmark ruling legalized abortion nationwide but divided public opinion and has been under attack ever since. 

The landmark ruling saw abortions decriminalized in 46 states, but under certain specific conditions which individual states could decide on. For example, states could decide whether abortions were allowed only during the first and second trimester but not the third (typically beyond 28 weeks). 

Among pro-choice campaigners, the decision was hailed as a victory which would mean fewer women would become seriously – or even fatally – ill from abortions carried out by unqualified or unlicensed practitioners. Moreover, the freedom of choice was considered a significant step in the equality fight for women in the country. Victims of rape or incest would be able to have the pregnancy terminated and not feel coerced into motherhood.

However, pro-lifers contended it was tantamount to murder and that every life, no matter how it was conceived, is precious. Though the decision has never been overturned, anti-abortionists have prompted hundreds of states laws since then narrowing the scope of the ruling.

Following the ruling, McCorvey lived a quiet life until the 1980s when she revealed herself to be Jane Roe. McCorvey became a leading, outspoken pro-abortion voice in American discourse, even working at a women’s clinic where abortions were performed.

However,  she performed an unlikely U-turn in 1995, becoming a born-again Christian and began traveling the country speaking out against the procedure.

In 2003, a she filed a motion to overturn her original 1973 ruling with the U.S. district court in Dallas. The motion moved through the courts until it was ultimately denied by the Supreme Court in 2005.

McCorvey died at an assisted living home in Texas in February 2017, aged 69. She admitted before she died that she made the change in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

This is my deathbed confession,’ she says. ‘I took their money and they took me out in front of the cameras and told me what to say. That’s what I’d say.’ 

In the interview, McCorvey refers to herself as ‘the Big Fish’ in the eyes of evangelical leaders who were eager to have her publicly switch sides and take up their cause. 

In addressing her activism for the religious right, McCorvey boasts: ‘I’m a good actress.’

Shelley Lynn Thornton, now 51, is the biological daughter of Norma McCorvey and spoke on the record for the first time in 2021.

Shelley appeared on Good Morning America for her first ever TV interview. Her identity was only made public in September by The Atlantic.  

‘A lot of people didn’t know I existed,’ she said, adding she fears the world blames her for abortion being legal. 

‘It doesn’t revolve around me, I wasn’t the one who created this law. I’m not the one who created this movement. I had nothing to do with it. I was just a little itty-bitty thing and, you know, circumstances prevailed. 

‘My whole thinking is that, “oh God everybody is going to hate me because everyone is going to blame me for abortion being legal,’ she said. 

Thornton, who never met her birth mother in person before her death in 2017, told journalist Joshua Prager she had decided to speak out after more than half a century because she wanted to free herself from the ‘secrets and lies.’

‘Secrets and lies are, like, the two worst things in the whole world. I’m keeping a secret, but I hate it,’ she said, in an adapted excerpt from Prager’s new book ‘The Family Roe: An American Story’, published in The Atlantic.  

‘I want everyone to understand that this is something I’ve chosen to do.’ 

 Politico reported Monday night that Justice Samuel Alito, one of six justices appointed by Republican presidents on the nine-member court, wrote a majority draft opinion in February repudiating both Roe and the 1992 Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision.

‘Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,’ Alito writes in the opinion, which was reportedly circulated among the court members. ‘We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,’ he continues in the document, titled ‘Opinion of the Court.’

‘It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.’

The news sent shock waves throughout Washington D.C. with Democrats vowing to codify the legal right to an abortion into law and Republicans celebrating the news. 

Politico noted that this is the first such case in modern history of a Supreme Court draft decision being leaked to the public while the case was still pending.

The draft document is not final until the court formally announces its decision in a case, meaning the ruling could still be changed. The court is expected to issue its final ruling before its term is up in late June or early July.

 

Source: Daily Mail