A dozen other states have adopted similar laws, but all have been declared invalid in court.
Most US Supreme Court justices appeared inclined Monday to block a Texas law that represents the biggest blow to abortion rights in the country in nearly 50 years.
Four of the nine members of the highest court – the president of the Court, John Roberts, and the three progressive judges – had previously voted to stop the application of this law that, for two months, has drastically limited the right of Texans to terminate your pregnancy.
Two conservative judges appointed by former President Donald Trump, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, also appeared willing, after two hours of oral argument, to vote to freeze the new regulation, which, in a novel way, delegates the application of the law to ordinary citizens.
“It appears that six judges are skeptical of the vigilante system created by Texas,” Neal Katyal, who was deputy attorney general during the administration of former President Barack Obama, tweeted during the hearing.
The law passed in May by Republican Texas legislators prohibits abortion as soon as the embryo’s heartbeat is felt, that is, around six weeks of pregnancy, when most women do not know they are still pregnant. . The prohibition applies even in the case of incest or rape.
A dozen other states have adopted similar laws, but all have been declared invalid in court because they violate Supreme Court jurisprudence. This recognized in 1973 the right of women to have an abortion and specified in 1992 that it applies whenever the fetus is not viable outside the uterus, that is, around 22 weeks of pregnancy.
“Bonus for reporting”
Texas, a true laboratory of the most conservative ideas, has nevertheless devised a new device that complicates the intervention of federal justice.
Texas law entrusts citizens “exclusively” with the task of enforcing this ban, encouraging them to take civil action against individuals and organizations that help women have abortions beyond six weeks.
In case of victory in court, these citizens will obtain a compensation of 10,000 dollars, establishes the law. His detractors see it as a “bonus for reporting.”
Two months ago, the conservative-majority Supreme Court invoked procedural reasons for refusing, by a narrow 5-4 majority, to block the entry into force of the law on September 1.
His inaction, seen as a sign of the influence of the three Trump-appointed justices, had been heavily criticized by the left. Democratic President Joe Biden then criticized a decision that “insults the rule of law.”
Since then, the legal battle has intensified with the intervention of the federal government and contradictory court decisions, so the Supreme Court has finally decided to dedicate a hearing to the case.
“Some geniuses”
On Monday, reflecting the divisions in American society over abortion, protesters from both sides gathered in Washington in front of the Courthouse, carrying banners with irreconcilable messages: “Abortion is essential” or “Let their hearts beat.”
In the white marble building, the nine judges were not discussing this right but only the legal mechanism created by Texas.
Progressive magistrate Elena Kagan questioned that “some geniuses” have invented this device as a way to “evade” the principle that “states should not override federal constitutional rights.”
The conservative Kavanaugh was concerned “about the implications for other constitutional rights.” For example, he asked, could there be “a law that allows anyone who owns an AR-15 rifle to claim millions of dollars?”
His colleague Barrett stressed for his part that the law could not be blocked at the state court level, cutting off the argument of the other three conservatives who seemed to want to rely on local justice.
The Supreme Court could therefore agree with the family planning organizations, which are asking it to block the law.
However, the high court seemed more skeptical of an appeal filed by the Biden administration, which also asks it to block the law but with different legal arguments. Several justices have suggested that they do not want to allow the federal government to invade the sovereignty of the states.
Your decision should be published soon.
Whatever the outcome of this hearing, the battle will not end here: The Supreme Court must examine a Mississippi law on December 1 that prohibits abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. (I)
Paul is a talented author and journalist with a passion for entertainment and general news. He currently works as a writer at the 247 News Agency, where he has established herself as a respected voice in the industry.
