Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> IT IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT
RULING EVEN THOUGH IT IS
ESSENTIALLY A NONRULING.
THEY ARE NOT GOING TO REVIEW IT.
THE REASON WE WERE ALL FOLLOWING
THE HORN CASE IS BECAUSE IT
REPRESENTED A SWEEPING CHALLENGE
TO ROE VS WADE AND ITS PRONLGGY
ANY.
THE STATE WAS SHORTENING THE
PERIOD YOU COULD HAVE A LAWFUL
ABORTION TO 20 WEEKS, WHICH WAS
EARLIER 24 WEEKS BUT IT WAS
ASKING THE COURT TO CONSIDER
THINGS LIKE FETAL PAIN AND OTHER
FACTORS THAT WOULD INCREASE THE
AUTHORITY OF STATE TO RESTRICT
ABORTIONS.
THE FINAL QUESTION FOR THEM TO
THE COURT WAS ACTUALLY TO SAY,
LOOK, THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF
MEDICAL CHANGES, A LOT OF
SCIENTIFIC CHANGES.
WE THINK YOU SHOULD REVIEW THE
ENTIRE LINE OF ROE V. WADE FOR A
MAJOR OVERHAUL.
ALL OF THAT THE COURT DECLINED
TO DO.
>> MANY, MANY STATES ARE PUTTING
INTO PLACE VERY RESTRICTIVE
ABORTION LAWS.
TEXAS COMES TO MIND.
HOW MIGHT THIS NONDECISION
DECISION AFFECT TEXAS.
>> THAT'S INTERESTING.
TEXAS IS STILL OUT THERE.
A NUMBER OF THE STATES HAVE LIVE
TORPEDOS IN THE WATER.
WE ARE NOT SURE.
THE COURT CAN ALWAYS TAKE A
LATER CASE.
IT DIDN'T RULE ON THE MERITS
HERE.
IT DID ALLOW THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DECISION TO STAND.
I THINK YOU ARE GOING TO
CONTINUE TO SEE THESE
CHALLENGES.
THE REASON IS THAT MANY PEOPLE
DON'T REALIZE THAT ROE V. WADE
WAS FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED IN A
CASE CALLED CASEY.
A LOT OF PEOPLE REFER TO THE
TRIMESTER SYSTEM, WHICH IS
SOMETHING THE COURT DID AWAY
WITH.
THE ONE THING THAT THE COURT
RETAINED WAS THIS QUESTION OF
VIABILITY, THAT ONCE THAT FETUS
BECOMES VIABLE OUTSIDE THE WOMB,
THE STATE'S AUTHORITY INCREASES.