Supreme Court hears Mississippi abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade: LIVE UPDATES
The U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday heard a challenge to a Mississippi law that bans abortions after 15 weeks.
Coverage for this event has ended.
Supreme Court debates abortion rights case challenging Roe v. Wade
Rep. McMorris Rodgers 'hopeful' modern science will sway public opinion against abortion
Washington Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers told Fox News Wednesday she is "hopeful" modern developments in science and technology will help turn public opinion on abortion.
"I am hopeful that as people really consider the science, the research, the technology, that more and more are going to review their position on this question," she said in answer to whether she believes the majority of Americans support overturning Roe v. Wade. "It’s the sharpest soul-searching question before us as a nation."
Hawley says Democratic rhetoric amid SCOTUS abortion hearing ‘really dangerous’
Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley condemned Democratic comments as "really dangerous" as the Supreme Court prepares to review the precedent set for abortion rights under Roe v. Wade.
"We’re seeing a predictable ramp-up already in rhetoric from Democrats, including Democratic senators about how it will be a revolution if the court overturns Roe," he told Fox News. "This is really inappropriate and dangerous rhetoric."
"Really dangerous," he added.
Sotomayor compares fetus to brain dead person, says fetal movement doesn't prove consciousness
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor rejected the idea that a fetus that has the ability to move and react to pain is a human life that should be protected from abortion.
"Virtually every state defines a brain death as death," Sotomayor, appointed by former President Barack Obama, said during oral arguments in a potential landmark abortion rights case Wednesday, as the state of Mississippi defended an abortion restriction law that directly challenges Roe v. Wade.
"Yet, the literature is filled with episodes of people who are completely and utterly brain dead responding to stimuli," Sotomayor continued. "There's about 40 percent of dead people who, if you touch their feet, the foot will recoil. There are spontaneous acts by dead brain people. So I don't think that a response to -- by a fetus necessarily proves that there's a sensation of pain or that there's consciousness."
Abortion 'saves lives,' woman says as protesters crowd around Supreme Court
Pro-life and pro-choice protesters who gathered outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning told Fox News why they came to protest, with one saying abortions save lives, while others said they kill humans.
"I'm here today because I think that abortion hurts both the unborn and it hurts women," an anti-abortion activist told Fox News.
In contrast, a pro-choice supporter said: "I'm here today because I believe that a woman's right to choose her future, her destiny, her reproductive health care, is a fundamental right."
ACLU under fire for tweet celebrating abortion as 'rad' day of Supreme Court oral arguments
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is under fire for tweeting a photo of a protester's sign outside the Supreme Court Wednesday that protrayed abortion as "rad."
The Supreme Court ended oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization on Wednesday. The case centers on a Mississippi law which bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, earlier than the current legal standard, which prohibits abortion bans prior to fetal viability, about 23 to 24 weeks into pregnancy.
Abortion rights activists are concerned the decision by the majority-conservative Supreme Court could overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark ruling limiting government restrictions on abortion.
Biden reacts to Supreme Court abortion case, says he still supports Roe v. Wade
President Biden on Wednesday said he supports and "will continue to support" Roe v. Wade, as the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case posing potentially the most consequential challenge to the 1973 landmark ruling that limited government restrictions on abortion.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. The state of Mississippi is arguing that the Supreme Court should allow it and other states to ban abortion after 15 weeks. More specifically, it is asking the high court to strike down a lower court’s decision blocking its 15-week abortion ban from taking effect.
Squad member Cori Bush says she shouldn’t have to fight for abortion access
Rep. Cori Bush said women should have abortion access without a fight, the Missouri Democrat told Fox News outside the Capitol on Wednesday.
"We always have to fight for the things that we shouldn't even have to ask for," Bush told Fox News after she gathered with around 35 fellow House Democrats supporting abortion rights. Among them was Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado, a Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus co-chair who was heard shouting, "Abortion is essential."
Lawmakers remain divided as Roe v. Wade hangs in the balance at Supreme Court
Lawmakers on the Hill remain divided after the Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in a case that questions a near 50-year precedent set under Roe v Wade.
Congressional leaders have dubbed the case – Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health – the "most consequential abortion case in decades."
"If SCOTUS overturns Roe v. Wade millions will lose access to abortion care & decades of precedent will be overturned," Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., tweeted.
Republicans are sticking to their guns as well and have championed the case as a way forward in overturning the controversial precedent.
"Roe v. Wade was a bad decision, and the Supreme Court acted far outside of the Constitution when it created this precedent nearly 50 years ago," Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said. "Our country was founded on the right to life, a right that should be extended to unborn children."
Supreme Court oral arguments in Dobbs prompt strong reactions from both sides of abortion debate
Both sides of the abortion debate offered their reactions to oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The highly contentious case is a potential game changer for both sides of the movement since it could undo decades of precedent on the issue.
"The pro-life movement should rejoice with how the SCOTUS oral argument went," said Roger Severino, a former Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) official in the Trump administration.
Mears: Supreme Court likely to weaken Roe, but might not completely overturn it
From Fox News' Bill Mears:
Instead of the usual majority opinion, I think the Court is prepared to offer a plurality opinion—perhaps a 3-3-3 vote with Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett offering a more nuanced decision.
So any plurality ruling would mean Roe would neither be struck down in its entirety or upheld in its entirety.
That plurality would say Mississippi’s 15-week ban can be enforced, and that the “viability” standard from Roe v Wade no longer governs, and no longer will be the constitutional standard.
Roe guarantees abortions pre-viability, usually at about 24 weeks. The court will say the Mississippi is not an "undue burden " -- the standard set in the 1992 Casey case -- since women could still have an abortion up to 15 weeks. 90% of abortions are performed in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, per the CDC.
The court for now will sidestep whether earlier state bans -- 12 weeks and 6 weeks (the Texas heartbeat law) can stand.
The court only will only address the specifics of the 15 week Mississippi law and it was clear the conservatives on the court were ready to make dramatic changes limiting abortion rights.
Turley: Democrats threatening impartial judicial system
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., has joined the growing ranks of members of Congress in issuing a warning to the Supreme Court: reaffirm Roe v. Wade or else.
The "else" varies from promises to pack the court to personal accountability for justices. For Shaheen, it is a promise of "revolution."
It is the latest demand that the justice yield to popular demand or any countervailing interpretation of the Constitution. Or else.
"So you say you want a revolution." However, these threats are an attack on the very concept of impartial judicial review. "When you talk about destruction" of our traditions of judicial review, as the Beatles declared in 1968, "you can count me out."
Threatening the Supreme Court has become something of a required public exhibition of faith for Democrats, a demonstration that abstract notions like judicial independence will not distract from achieving political results.
Click here to read more on Fox News.
WATCH: USCP arrests protesters near Supreme Court
U.S. Capitol Police arrested protesters Wednesday about one block north of the U.S. Supreme Court for allegedly blocking traffic.
An officer told Fox News' Matt Wall that the protesters will be processed and released on scene.
USCP: Arresting protesters for blocking roads
The U.S. Capitol Police says its officers are arresting protesters for blocking roads near the Supreme Court.
"We are giving roughly 40 demonstrators warnings to stop violating DC Code § 22–1307- Crowding, Obstructing or Incommoding near First Street, NE and Constitution Avenue," the USCP said in a tweet Wednesday.
"We have given the demonstrators three warnings and are now arresting them for violating DC Code § 22–1307- Crowding, Obstructing or Incommoding in an area where protesting is prohibited," it added a few minutes later. "This does not affect the lawful demonstrators who are in front of the U.S. Supreme Court."
First Street immediately in front of the Supreme Court was blocked off by police, including at the intersection of First Street SE and East Capitol Street NE -- that is where lawful demonstrators were protesting since the morning.
The USCP alert indicates the demonstrators were obstructing traffic near Constitution Avenue, which was not closed to traffic. That intersection is approximately a block north of the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court oral arguments end in critical Mississippi abortion case
Oral arguments in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ended shortly before noon Wednesday after nearly two hours of arguments.
Many believe the case is the most important abortion litigation in the last 40 years.
The fate of the case -- and the Roe v. Wade abortion precedent -- now rests in the hands of the court's nine justices.
A decision will likely come sometime in the spring.
Kavanaugh, Breyer clash on Supreme Court precedent in Mississippi abortion case
Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Stephen Breyer clashed over the role the Supreme Court has in overturning its own precedents Wednesday during arguments in a major Mississippi abortion case.
The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, has the potential to overturn Roe v. Wade.
"History tells a somewhat different story, I think, than is sometimes assumed," Kavanaugh said about stare decisis -- the principle that the court should stick to its past rulings.
"If you think about some of the most important cases in this court's history... there's a string of them where the cases overruled precedent," he said.
Kavanaugh continued: "Brown v. Board outlawed separate but equal. Baker versus Carr, which set the stage for one person, one vote. West Coast Hotel, which recognized the state's authority to regulate business. Miranda versus Arizona, which required police to give warnings... about the right to remain silent... Lawrence v. Texas said that the state may not prohibit same sex conduct. Mapp v. Ohio, which held that the exclusionary rule applies to state criminal prosecution."
"In each of those cases... and I could go on. And those are some of the most consequential and important in the court's history, the court overruled precedent," Kavanaugh said.
A few minutes later Breyer slammed Kavanaugh for making allegedly false equivalencies between Roe and the other cases he cited.
"They do not include the list that Justice Kavanaugh had here... There are complex criteria that she's talking about that link to the position in the rule of law of this court," Breyer said. "All I would say is tou have to read them before beginning to say whether they are overruling or not overruling in the sense meant there calling for special concern."
Breyer was referring to the opinion of former Justice Sandra Day O'Conner in Planned Parenthood v. Casey analyzing when to overturn major precedents.
U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar agreed.
"This is actually another key distinction from the cases that Justice Kavanaugh was referring to," she said. "The decision to overrule nevertheless, perhaps based on the... conclusion that the justices thought the case was wrongly decided in the first instance, would run counter to the ability of stare decisis to function as a cornerstone of the rule of law."
Alito grills pro-choice lawyer on validity of viability as line for abortion regulations
Justice Saumel Alito grilled a pro-choice lawyer during oral arguments in a major abortion case Wednesday over whether using viability as the threshold for when a state can ban abortion is a valid standard.
"What would you say to the argument that has been made many times by people who are pro-choice and pro-life, that the line really doesn't make any sense -- that it is, as Justice Blackman himself described it, arbitrary?" Alito asked Center for Reproductive Rights counsel Julie Rikelman.
Alito argued that a woman has the same interest in terminating a pregnancy after the viability line is crossed and that, "the fetus has an interest in having a life" both before and after viability.
"In some people's view it doesn't, your honor" Rikelman replied. "It is principled because in ordering the interests at stake, the court had to set a line between conception and birth."
The case the court is hearing is about a Mississippi abortion law that bans abortion after 15 weeks -- before viability.
Roberts: Why isn't 15 weeks enough time to choose whether to abort a baby?
Chief Justice John Roberts Wednesday questioned the lawyer challenging a Mississippi abortion law about why its ban on abortion after 15 weeks doesn't give women enough time to choose to terminate a pregnancy.
"If you think that the issue is one of choice -- that women should have a choice to terminate their pregnancy -- that supposes that there is a point at which they've had the fair choice, opportunity to choice," Roberts said. "And why would 15 weeks be an inappropriate line? Viability, it seems to me, doesn't have anything to do with choice. But if it really is an issue about choice, why is 15 weeks not enough time?"
Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer Julie Rickelman replied that changing the standard for when states can ban abortions would create a slippery slope.
"The state has conceded that some women will not be able obtain an abortion before 15 weeks and this law will bar them from doing so," she said. "Without viability, there will be no stopping point. States will rush to ban abortion at virtually any point in pregnancy."
Roberts, however, said that most other countries ban abortion after 15 weeks, and that the U.S. is in the company of North Korea and China in allowing late-term abortions.
Counselor: Abortion is critical to women's equal participation in society
Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer Julie Rikelman said Wednesday at Supreme Court oral arguments over a Mississippi abortion law that abortion is critical for a woman's rights and participation in society.
"Mississippi's ban on abortion two months before viability is flatly unconstitutional under decades of precedent," she said in her opening statement. "Preserving a woman's right to make this decision until viability protects her liberty while logically balancing the other interests at stake... Eliminating or reducing the right to abortion will propel women backwards."
Kavanaugh questions lawyer on whether Supreme Court can prohibit abortion
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked the lawyer defending a Mississippi law restricting abortion Wednesday whether the Supreme Court can ban abortion -- and the lawyer said it can't.
"To be clear, you're not arguing that the court somehow has the authority to itself prohibit abortion or that this court has the authority to order the states to prohibit abortion, as I understand it? Correct?" Kavanaugh asked Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart.
Stewart said that is correct.
"As I understand it, you're arguing that the Constitution's silent and therefore neutral on the question of abortion. In other words, that the Constitution's neither pro-life nor pro-choice?" Kavanaugh said.
Stewart also agreed with that statement.