Tag: abortion

When the U.S. Supreme Court decided Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on June 22, 2022, it was a matter of time before abortion would have another hearing in the high court. On Wednesday this week justices heard oral arguments on whether the State of Idaho’s abortion ban is constitutional in Moyle vs. United States. Alice Miranda Ollstein and Josh Gerstein reported on Politico:

The Supreme Court on Wednesday will consider — for the first time since it overturned Roe v. Wade —whether an individual state’s abortion ban is constitutional.

The justices will hear arguments on whether federal law requires emergency room physicians in Idaho to perform abortions to stabilize pregnant patients experiencing a medical crisis despite the state’s near-total prohibition on the procedure, which only allows doctors to end a pregnancy when the mother’s life is in danger.

It’s the second major abortion case of the term, following last month’s arguments over the FDA’s regulation of the widely used abortion pill mifepristone, and the latest example of how overturning Roe and returning abortion rights to the states did not keep the courts out of the fray, as some justices had hoped. Decisions in both cases are expected in June.

The Idaho case homes in on the clash between red states’ desire to ban nearly all abortions and President Joe Biden administration’s efforts to preserve some access to the procedure, and the arguments come amid a roiling national debate on the issue. And it comes as doctors around the country plead for clarity on the parameters of the medical emergency exemptions to state bans, warning that vague definitions of “life-threatening” and the prospect of criminal charges are creating a chilling effect that deters them from providing needed care in patients’ most vulnerable moments.

5 questions about the Supreme Court’s next major abortion case by Alice Miranda Ollstein and Josh Gerstein, April 24, 2024.

Read the entire article here. I recommend following Alice Miranda Ollstein’s work at Politico.

The irony in 2024 is that Roe Vs. Wade was the compromise on what was then, and continues to be, the controversial issue of abortion. It is unlikely times have changed in that regard since Jan. 22, 1973, when Roe was decided (7-2). Despite talk about “letting the states decide” on abortion, given diversity of opinion among the states, combined with Republican efforts to have government control women’s bodies and health care, SCOTUS will inevitably have to re-decide Roe or something like it. When that will be is anyone’s guess, yet I submit, that day is coming.

Based on the boiling-over outrage I heard from three female justices during oral arguments on Wednesday, Idaho seems unlikely to prevail in this case. I mean, if one is arguing a case before the Supreme Court in support of your state’s extreme abortion ban, you might need Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett on your side. Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern explained on Slate:

Justice Amy Coney Barrett famously provided the crucial fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022. So if you are arguing in favor of an abortion ban, you probably don’t want to alienate Barrett—by, say, condescendingly dismissing her concerns when she points out that your legal theory doesn’t make any sense. Yet that is what Joshua Turner did on Wednesday while defending Idaho’s draconian abortion restrictions, and much to Barrett’s evident irritation. Turner—who represented the Idaho solicitor general’s office in the second major abortion case to come before the high court after it promised us in its Dobbs opinion that the court was out of the abortion business in 2022—might just have lost his case by repeatedly mansplaining his self-contradictory position to Barrett and the other three women justices. In his toneless, dispassionate telling, his entirely incomprehensible position was just too complex for them to understand. And so he just kept repeating it, over and over. These justices, including Barrett, sounded increasingly fed up with his chin-stroking dissembling on an issue that’s literally life-or-death for pregnant women in red states.

The Lawyer Defending Idaho’s Abortion Ban Irritated the One Justice He Needed on His Side by Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern, Slate, April 24, 2024.

Read the rest of the article here. You can’t go wrong reading Dahlia Lithwick. How the case is decided is anyone’s guess after oral arguments.

Democratic Congressional Candidate Christina Bohannan held a round table discussion about abortion on March 26 in Iowa City. 10 people were in attendance to share their personal experiences and thoughts on the state of abortion rights in Iowa, according to the Daily Iowan. Citing a Des Moines Register poll, “61 percent of adults in Iowa believe abortion should be legal in all or most situations, and 35 percent believe abortions should be illegal in most or all situations.” A lot is at stake in the post-Dobbs era. It will take election of Democrats to turn the Republican tide that favors government intrusion into a woman’s health care.

Here is a link to the Iowa Democratic Party to get involved today.

The topic of abortion exploded in our news media this week. It had a short fuse. Historian Heather Cox Richardson summarized two national news events in her April 9 Letter from an American:

Yesterday, former president Trump released a video celebrating state control over abortion; today, a judicial decision in Arizona illuminated just what such state control means. With the federal recognition of the constitutional right to abortion gone since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, old laws left on state books once again are becoming the law of the land.

Letters from an American, Heather Cox Richardson, April 9, 2024.

On Thursday, the Iowa Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding Senate File 359, which specified after cardiac activity can be detected in a fetus, at about six weeks, abortion is banned. The law was blocked by the high court. Now that Roe vs. Wade has been overturned, Governor Reynolds seeks to reinstate the law.

Midst the shrapnel of takes about these events, folks are missing something. Simply put, abortion is one of three primary issues Republicans intend to leverage against President Joe Biden to strengthen their weak case for support in the electorate. The other two are the southern border and the economy. None of these will gain traction without accompanying Republican lies, distortion, and disinformation.

While a majority of Americans support a woman’s reproductive rights, including access to abortion, in the street fight that will be the 2024 political campaigns in Iowa, and across the country, a peculiar take on abortion will be a campaign issue. Trump did a poor job of articulating it during his video this week, but managed to squeeze it in, saying some favor abortion “up to and even beyond nine months.” Good grief! The Democratic position since Dobbs has been to codify the protections of Roe vs. Wade. There is no such thing as abortion beyond birth in Roe, or anywhere else. It is a lie for 45 to suggest there is.

I don’t agree with Iowa Republican Party Chair Jeff Kaufmann’s view, but he did a better job of articulating their tactics to use abortion as a campaign issue. Kaufmann was asked by Kay Henderson, moderator of Iowa Press:

Let’s shift to the general election and one of the major issues that will be presented. And your party’s nominee, Donald Trump, has said some states have gone too far in the post-Dobbs era. Is that going to be something that depresses turnout and votes for Republicans in Iowa in November?

Iowa Press, Iowa Public Television, April 5, 2024.

At the end of a somewhat rambling answer, Kaufmann got to abortion and said,

My guess is if you’ve got an independent voter that is somewhere in the middle of this particular issue and they’re going to have to move one way or the other and if abortion is that main issue, my guess they’re going to see abortion all the way to the point of birth, which you can’t get a major Democrat even in Iowa to say that they are against, versus a heartbeat bill, I will put my money on the fact that they’re going to go with a heartbeat bill and they’re going to go with the Republican position any time over abortion on demand up to the point of birth.

Iowa Press, Iowa Public Television, April 5, 2024.

There is no such thing as “abortion on demand up to the point of birth.” What Democrats seek to do is codify the protections for women that were found in Roe vs. Wade. Kaufmann is spreading disinformation.

“Democrats believe everyone deserves the right to make their own healthcare decisions,” according to the Iowa House Democrats April 8 newsletter. “Especially when it comes to reproductive care and abortion.” Government should have no role in a discussion between a pregnant woman and her doctor. None.

The difference is in tactics. Republicans can’t win the election if they tell the truth and they know it. Democrats who focus on polling which shows a majority of Iowans favor the right to an abortion, or who advance positive issues related to reproductive health care, aren’t wrong. What would be wrong is a failure to confront the lies, disinformation, and misinformation presented by Republicans to win over the electorate in the run up to the November election. I would like to see Iowa Democrats be more aggressive in fighting Republican lies regarding abortion or any issue. With the right encouragement from voters, I am confident they will.

Here is a link to the Iowa Democratic Party to get involved today.

Roe v. Wade was America’s compromise on abortion and a large majority of Americans support its protections. When the 45th president appointed three U.S. Supreme Court justices during his term, his intention was clear: overturn Roe v. Wade and create chaos so the country could go through the debate that resulted in Roe once again. Elections matter and so we are.

Christina Bohannan is a law professor who read all 200 Iowa court decisions related to abortion. Below is a recent video in which she discusses them and lays out a common sense approach to the controversial issue the 1973 Supreme Court decision represented. Her opponent, incumbent Congresswoman Mariannette Miller-Meeks sponsored the “Life at Conception Act,” which prohibits abortion and included no exceptions for rape, incest, or to save a woman’s life.

This week, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, President Biden rolled out his agenda to protect women’s rights, including codifying the protection of women’s rights outlined in Roe. To do that, Biden will need more Democratic members of Congress, beginning with replacing Miller-Meeks with Christina Bohannan in Iowa’s First Congressional District.

I hope you will watch the video and help Bohannan win in November. Follow Christina Bohannan on Facebook, and Instagram. Sign up with her campaign at  bohannanforcongress.com/

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Christina Bohannan (@christinaforcongress)