In an ongoing scene that could be out of Margaret Atwood’s book and the TV series The Handmaiden’s Tale, Republican men have been doing their best to eliminate a woman’s choice over her own body. Even though a recent CBS poll showed that two-thirds of Americans say they want Roe v. Wade left alone, these men continue in their fight to dominate women. Check out their latest attempt.
The Supreme Court turned down Indiana’s quest to bring back sections of its abortion law. Indiana has not traveled its case the traditional way — up through the court system. Instead, the state jumped to the Supreme Court. However, the Court said that a second ruling on how to dispose of fetal remains could stay in place. The ruling said that neither provision was an “undue burden” to the woman’s right to receive an abortion.
Some of the most interesting pieces of news are located in the footnotes of the Supreme Court’s Order List. Today Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and conservative Justice Clarence Thomas had it out over whether a woman seeking an abortion was as Thomas said: ‘A mother.’
Thomas wrote about a footnote that Ginsburg’s wrote about the law that Vice President Mike Pence signed into law during his time as Indiana’s governor. He said according to the Supreme Court Order List:
‘JUSTICE GINSBURG does not even attempt to argue that the decision below was correct. Instead, she adopts Chief Judge Wood’s alternative suggestion that regulating the disposition of an aborted child’s body might impose an ‘undue burden’ on the mother’s right to abort that (already aborted) child. This argument is difficult to understand, to say the least, which may explain why even respondent Planned Parenthood did not make it.’
Ginsburg fired back at Thomas in her own footnote. She reiterated to Thomas that “the court reviews judgments, not statements in opinions,” as she tore apart his arguments.
‘JUSTICE THOMAS’ footnote … displays more heat than light. The note overlooks many things. A woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother. The cost of, and trauma potentially induced by, a post-procedure requirement may well constitute an undue burden … under the rational-basis standard applied below, (and) Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky had no need to marshal evidence that Indiana’s law posed an undue burden.
The Court ruled that fetal remains must be cremated or buried after an abortion rather than be considered medical waste, as had been the case in Indiana. What if a woman cannot afford to bury or cremate the fetus? The law has never gone into effect. There has been very little experience with how the law is going to work.
The justices concluded 7-2 that the state of Indiana, according to ABC News, has a
‘…legitimate interest in the proper disposal of fetal remains (burying or cremating an aborted fetus does not impose) undue burden (on access to abortion)’.
The New York Times editorial board writer Cristian Farias tweeted:
‘Dueling footnotes from Justice Thomas and Justice Ginsburg in a Supreme Court decision that mostly OKs an Indiana law prescribing the disposal of fetal remains. Yes, they’re taking swipes at each other.’
Justice Clarence Thomas went all dramatic in his opinion. He wrote that “further percolation” was necessary. Yet, he would still uphold Indiana’s ban.
‘This law and other laws like it promote a state’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.’
The court applied the wrong test, Bader said.
Check out the entire Supreme Court Orders List here: