JUSTICE THOMAS: ‘This case serves as a stark reminder that our abortion jurisprudence has spiraled out of control…’
(Kaylee McGhee, Liberty Headlines) The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up a case to hear an appeal over Alabama’s pro-life law that bans abortions in which a pre-born infant is dismembered, in the second trimester of pregnancy.
The state passed the law in 2016 but was blocked by lower federal courts before it could take effect.
The law bans a specific procedure known as dilation and evacuation, in which a fetus is surgically removed from the uterus in pieces.
U.S. District Court Judge Myron Thompson said the pro-life law restricted women’s access to abortion, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, though they clearly sympathized with the law.
“The method involves tearing apart and extracting piece-by-piece from the uterus what was until then a living unborn child,” Chief Judge Ed Carnes wrote. “This is usually done during the 15-to-18 week stage of development, at which time the unborn child’s heart is already beating.
“In our judicial system, there is only one Supreme Court, and we are not it,” Carnes concluded.
The state, however, argued the law is consistent with the Supreme Court’s 1992 decision that upheld a ban on “partial birth abortions.”
Even Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case, but noted that the court’s standard for whether an abortion case should be heard is “demonstrably erroneous.”
“This case serves as a stark reminder that our abortion jurisprudence has spiraled out of control,” Thomas wrote, according to USA Today. “None of these decisions is supported by the text of the Constitution. Although this case does not present the opportunity to address our demonstrably erroneous ‘undue burden’ standard, we cannot continue blinking at the reality of what this court has wrought.”
Alabama recently passed an even more restrictive pro-life law that would completely ban abortions in the state.
Pro-choice advocates have vowed to take it to the courts, where it will likely be overturned if the Supreme Court declines to take that case up as well.