Abortion Flashcards
Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Abortion Pill Case
The Biden administration’s efforts to maintain expanded access to the abortion drug mifepristone (Mifepristone is a medication used to terminate pregnancies, often referred to as the “abortion pill.” It works by blocking the hormone progesterone, which is needed for a pregnancy to continue. Mifepristone is typically used in combination with another medication called misoprostol to induce abortion. Mifepristone is not Plan B. Plan B, also known as the “morning-after pill,” contains a different active ingredient called levonorgestrel. Plan B is used as emergency contraception to prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex or contraceptive failure, whereas mifepristone is used specifically for medical abortion to terminate an existing pregnancy.) surprisingly found some support among conservative justices during Supreme Court arguments. The discussion, which touched on issues likely to shape future rulings, included notable moments such as Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar explaining ectopic pregnancy detection to Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The case’s outcome could influence abortion access and FDA regulatory power. While justices expressed skepticism towards the challenge, concerns were raised about the ability of organizations to sue without demonstrating direct harm. Justices Barrett and Elena Kagan pressed anti-abortion groups on the specifics of their claims, while others questioned the validity of the challenge. There were suggestions of alternative solutions, such as invoking existing rights to refuse participation in abortions. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito also raised concerns about FDA policies and the Comstock Act’s applicability to abortion pills. Additionally, there was discussion about the impact of nationwide injunctions and the need for more limited relief. The Comstock Act, enacted in 1873, was a United States federal law that made it illegal to send or receive “obscene, lewd, or lascivious” materials, including information about contraceptives and abortion, through the mail. It was named after its chief proponent, Anthony Comstock, who was a moral crusader advocating for stricter regulation of obscenity and vice. The law aimed to restrict the distribution of materials related to birth control and abortion, viewing them as immoral and harmful to society. The Comstock Act is no longer in effect in its original form. Many of its provisions were gradually repealed or modified over the years, and it was effectively superseded by subsequent legislation and court rulings that expanded reproductive rights and freedom of expression. However, some aspects of the Comstock Act, particularly those related to obscenity laws, still have implications in modern legal contexts.
Florida voters will get to consider abortion rights ballot measure in November, court rules
The Florida Supreme Court has approved a ballot initiative for November that would amend the state’s Constitution to ensure broader abortion access, with exceptions for parental notification of minors and when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by a healthcare provider. The amendment, which requires 60% of the vote to pass, aims to undo current abortion restrictions in the state. Despite challenges from the Republican Attorney General Ashley Moody, the court ruled in favor of placing the referendum on the ballot, rejecting claims that it could have broader implications than intended. She argued that the amendment was “designed to lay ticking time bombs that will enable abortion proponents later to argue that the amendment has a much broader meaning than voters would ever have thought.” However, the state Supreme Court rejected this argument, allowing the initiative to proceed to the ballot. Similar measures nationwide have succeeded since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision on Roe v. Wade, with some seeing it as a key issue for voter turnout.
Florida state Supreme Court upholds 15-week abortion ban, paving way for 6-week ban
The Florida state Supreme Court upheld the state’s 15-week abortion ban, rejecting a legal challenge seeking its dismissal. This decision allows a six-week trigger ban to take effect in 30 days, preventing abortions before most women realize they’re pregnant. (A trigger ban is a type of abortion restriction that is designed to automatically take effect if certain conditions are met, such as the overturning of Roe v. Wade or a change in federal law. In the context of abortion, a trigger ban typically prohibits the procedure once specific conditions are met, such as a certain gestational age or the occurrence of a specific event, like the reversal of federal abortion protections.) The ruling stemmed from an ongoing lawsuit by the ACLU and others, arguing the ban violates the state Constitution. Despite this victory for Governor Ron DeSantis and Republicans, a November ballot initiative could potentially reverse the ban. The court also approved a ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state Constitution, leaving the future of abortion access in the hands of voters. Florida’s significance in providing abortion services to neighboring states affected by bans was highlighted by data showing increased abortion rates due to women traveling across state lines for care. Earlier, a lower state court suspended the ban, citing violations of the state constitution, but it was reinstated on appeal. The plaintiffs contended that a privacy clause in the state constitution protects abortion rights.
