The biggest threat is buried deep in the decision...
What Kennedy is saying here is that if pro-lifers pass an abortion ban without any health exception, then women can successfully sue to have the ban overturned only in “as applied” cases. So a ban might not be illegal generally, but it still might be illegal in the case of Betty Smith of Memphis, who might be able to convince a court the ban “as applied” to women with her specific health circumstances is unconstitutional because it threatens her health.
But even if one lawsuit is successful in overturning the law “as applied” to the particular person who sued, the law could still apply to other women in other circumstances - meaning all those women would have to sue individually if they think the law is unconstitutionally being applied to them. The net effect could be to make it much harder for pro-choice activists to get Courts to consider whether or not new abortion-related laws are Constitutional.
So let’s say that Betty Smith has uterine scarring, and can convince a court for health reasons that the PBA ban is unconstitutional as applied to her and other women with her exact health conditions. That does nothing at all for Judy Jones, who has placenta previa; Judy has to initiate a whole new lawsuit regarding if the PBA bas is constitutional “as applied” to people in her condition.
« Older "Venezuela and Cuba have both asked that Posada be... | The USA playing global sheriff... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt