Supreme Court agrees to hear potentially pivotal case challenging Roe v. Wade

In a sign that the Supreme Court may be poised to deal a serious blow to a key aspect of the landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade, it was announced Monday that the justices have agreed to hear a Mississippi case centering on the question of when viability begins in the womb, as Fox News reports.

In the case at issue, Thomas Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, the Mississippi attorney general is asking the high court to determine the constitutionality of a state statute from 2018 that bans abortion after 15 weeks. According to the petition for certiorari, that requires the justices to review and resolve ambiguities in its own prior decisions about the point at which viability truly begins, as the Associated Press noted.

The statute in Mississippi would permit abortions beyond 15 weeks if profound fetal abnormality was found or if there was a medical emergency threatening the mother’s life. If allowed to take effect, doctors who violate the law would be subject to medical license suspension or revocation, the AP added.

Mississippi’s ban on abortions past 15 weeks of gestation has previously been thwarted by lower courts that held it to be inconsistent with Supreme Court decisions protecting the right to an abortion at any point before a fetus is able to survive on its own.

The abortion clinic has argued that viability before 15 weeks is not possible and that 24 weeks is the true threshold beyond which babies stand a strong chance of survival outside the womb. The state, however, claims that viability represents an arbitrary measure that disregard’s the government’s interest in imposing limits on abortion.

In expressing optimism regarding the case, John Bursch of the Alliance Defending Freedom said, “The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that states are free to regulate late-term abortions. Thanks to amazing progress in scientific research and medical technology, the concept of ‘viability’ is an ever-moving target as younger children have survived and thrived after pre-term birth.”

Bursch added, “But ‘viability’ has never been a legitimate way to determine a developing infant’s dignity or to decide anybody’s legal existence. The high court should take this important opportunity to resolve the conflicts between its previous rulings and affirm the constitutionality of Mississippi’s law.”

Hillary Schneller, a lawyer representing the abortion clinic in the case disagreed, arguing, “In an unbroken line of decisions over the last fifty years, this Court has held that the Constitution guarantees each person the right to decide whether to continue a pre-viability pregnancy,” and that the state’s claims were “based on a misunderstanding of the core principle” of prior SCOTUS rulings, according to CNBC.

Notably, the high court has declined prior opportunities to hear appeals focused on previability bans on abortion, and the justices delayed action on this case for a number of months. Now, in the absence of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – a zealous proponent of abortion rights – and the ascension to the bench of conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, it appears the court may well be prepared to effect a significant shift in this important area of jurisprudence.

 
We welcome your comments on Main Street Gazette. Big tech is trying to censor conservative media, and there are fewer and fewer places on the web to build a conservative community.
 
We’re committed to defending freedom of speech and being a safe space for the 75 million Americans that the mainstream media is trying to cancel. Any comments containing profanity, trolling, advocacy of violence, personally identifiable information, harassments, threats or other violations will be removed. Sometimes comments are wrongly removed by our tech software – please contact us at [email protected] if you believe your comments have been wrongly removed

14 Responses

  1. So the SCOTUS will listen to abortion crap but not about fraud votes with the election! They can go to h___! Disgusting, repulsive, deplorable! Oh let’s not try to see if our votes counted for who we voted for! Pathetic! I have no respect for the Justice system, at all from FBI to the justices! Something is wrong when they don’t seem to work for justice! It stinks! Something stinks! The Dems have corroded our country, our Justice system!

  2. Disrespect for the most vulnerable among us disrespects all. We have reduced life to a flippant decision, popping a pill, abortion on demand, abortion up to the moment of birth.

    Abortion is eliminating a life. Life is a God given right. No one has the right to determine who lives and who dies, not a mother, not a doctor. Life is to be revered and respected, protected and cherished, PROTECT LIFE, ALL LIFE, AT ALL TIMES AND TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITIES!

  3. What does ever one expect from the Baby Killer court. Just remember GOD is watching, There will be justice in the end when GOD comes back. AMEN.!!!!!

  4. I think that 15 weeks is too early to survive outside of the womb…..22 weeks is questionable, many doctors will not resuscitate until 23 weeks, most do not survive and it is torturous treatment as the fetus can feel pain. With that said, an elective abortion should NOT be preformed after 12 weeks gestation….it is actually very dangerous for the mother as many health issues can arise.
    As far as using abortion as a form of birth control, which they do in some countries, it is not healthy and it leads to a very cold hearted, indifferent society.

  5. The suprem court can take abortion case, but refuse to take case of voter fraud for a presidentail election??? what kind of priorty is that? what do we have a suprime court for? They are not doing what they were put in that position to ignore what is importent to our country. KICK THEM OUT.

  6. This is not a religious based comment. I believe the medical community knows when a baby will survive an early birth. They have years of data to provide the Supreme Court. This information can be used to set the latest week an abortion may be provided a patient.

  7. ❤💥👍CHRISTrumpOwens and all their US TRUMPlican Lawmakers successfully US 2021/2022/2024 Reelected Landslide
    Amen & Amen👍💥❤

  8. I make more then $12,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 11 to 12 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it…GOOD LUCK..
    ===))> 𝐖­𝐰­𝐰­.­𝐖­𝐨­𝐫­𝐤­𝐢­𝐛­𝐚­𝐫.­𝐂­𝐨­𝐦

    1. I don’t subscribe to Mainstreet Gazette to read this kind of B.S. If it keeps up I will unsubscribe!!!!!!

  9. I get paid over $190 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 15k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless.
    HERE ➤➤ 𝐰­𝐰­𝐰­.­𝐒­𝐧­𝐚­𝐠­𝟒­.­𝐜­𝐨­𝐦

  10. I basically make about $6,000-$8,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it…..===))> 𝐰𝐰𝐰.𝐂𝐚𝐬𝐡𝐀𝐩𝐩𝟑.𝐜𝐨𝐦

  11. LIFE CHANGING OPPORTUNITY BE an Internet HOME-BASED real Earner. I am just working on my laptop only 3 to 4 hours a Day and earning $ 47786 a month easily, that is handsome earning to meet my extra expenses and that is really life changing opportunity. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone.

    Go to home media tech tab for more detail………..—->> 𝐰𝐰𝐰.𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐚𝐩𝐩𝟕.𝐜𝐨𝐦

  12. This is true that there is many search in google about home working many people done many works but the fact is that works fill their daily expendature?wad i also working on my laptop and earn a best salery do You wana how i did it that is tha best working site…===))>>> 𝐰­𝐰­𝐰­.­𝐒­𝐧­𝐚­𝐠­𝟒­.­𝐜­𝐨­𝐦

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.