Alito: Day One

Oh, good:

The Supreme Court announced today that it will hear a challenge to a federal law outlawing a late-term abortion procedure, reopening the contentious issue on Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.'s first day on the bench.

The law, the Partial Birth Abortion Act, was passed in 2003 but was immediately challenged in court and has never taken effect. It was ruled unconstitutional by three federal appeals courts in the last year, in rulings based on a Supreme Court decision in 2000 striking down a similar law passed in Nebraska.

In that case, Stenberg v. Carhart, a 5-to-4 majority that included the now-retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor found that any abortion ban must include an exception for the health of the mother. Justice Alito was sworn in three weeks ago as Justice O'Connor's successor after a rancorous confirmation process that focused heavily on the question of abortion.

More from Jessica (Feministing), The Betamax Guillotine, Fred Vincy (Stone Court).

Comments

[Sean]

Oh man.

Just for a moment, imagine that Alito votes the way O'Connor did, and agrees that a mother's health exception is Constitutionally required. Not very likely, I know, but imagine it.

We'd all be covered in right wing cerebral viscera from all the exploding heads on the conservative side of the aisle.

[ghostcatbce]

Here it comes just as everyone knew it would. If this turns out to be as bad as everyone's predicted, the Dems who took the coward's way out, and voted for cloture, should never, ever hear the end of it. That goes for so-called pro-lifers like Bob Casey. Anne Lamont has it exactly right; there is nothing to be ashamed of in supporting a woman's right to have an abortion.

[Fitz]

""In that case, Stenberg v. Carhart, a 5-to-4 majority that included the now-retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor found that any abortion ban must include an exception (Big enough to ultimately render moot the legislation itself) for the "health" of the mother.

[Scott Lemieux]

Adieu, Roe. Or maybe it will just be au revoir...

[Eli]

Who can explain this new RFRA case to me without me having to read it?