Current:Home > StocksWisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -OceanicInvest
Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
View
Date:2025-04-15 18:36:51
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Monday on whether a law that legislators adopted more than a decade before the Civil War bans abortion and can still be enforced.
Abortion-rights advocates stand an excellent chance of prevailing, given that liberal justices control the court and one of them remarked on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights. Monday’s arguments are little more than a formality ahead of a ruling, which is expected to take weeks.
Wisconsin lawmakers passed the state’s first prohibition on abortion in 1849. That law stated that anyone who killed a fetus unless the act was to save the mother’s life was guilty of manslaughter. Legislators passed statutes about a decade later that prohibited a woman from attempting to obtain her own miscarriage. In the 1950s, lawmakers revised the law’s language to make killing an unborn child or killing the mother with the intent of destroying her unborn child a felony. The revisions allowed a doctor in consultation with two other physicians to perform an abortion to save the mother’s life.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it. When the Supreme Court overturned Roe two years ago, conservatives argued that the Wisconsin ban was enforceable again.
Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul filed a lawsuit challenging the law in 2022. He argued that a 1985 Wisconsin law that allows abortions before a fetus can survive outside the womb supersedes the ban. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation.
Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, argues the 1849 ban should be enforceable. He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point. Other modern-day abortion restrictions also don’t legalize the practice, he argues.
Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled last year that the old ban outlaws feticide — which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother’s consent — but not consensual abortions. The ruling emboldened Planned Parenthood to resume offering abortions in Wisconsin after halting procedures after Roe was overturned.
Urmanski asked the state Supreme Court in February to overturn Schlipper’s ruling without waiting for lower appellate courts to rule first. The court agreed to take the case in July.
Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin filed a separate lawsuit in February asking the state Supreme Court to rule directly on whether a constitutional right to abortion exists in the state. The court agreed in July to take that case as well. The justices have yet to schedule oral arguments.
Persuading the court’s liberal majority to uphold the ban appears next to impossible. Liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz stated openly during her campaign that she supports abortion rights, a major departure for a judicial candidate. Usually, such candidates refrain from speaking about their personal views to avoid the appearance of bias.
The court’s three conservative justices have accused the liberals of playing politics with abortion.
veryGood! (78945)
Related
- FACT FOCUS: Inspector general’s Jan. 6 report misrepresented as proof of FBI setup
- Driver in Treat Williams fatal crash pleads not guilty
- Video shows California deputy slamming 16-year-old girl to the ground outside football game
- Former New Zealand prime minister and pandemic prep leader says we’re unprepared for the next one
- A South Texas lawmaker’s 15
- 5 dead, including one child, after 2 private planes collide in northern Mexico
- EU member states weaken proposal setting new emission standards for cars and vans
- Horoscopes Today, September 25, 2023
- Arkansas State Police probe death of woman found after officer
- Euphoria Star Angus Cloud's Mom Shares His Heartbreaking Last Words
Ranking
- What do we know about the mysterious drones reported flying over New Jersey?
- Interest rates will stay high ‘as long as necessary,’ the European Central Bank’s leader says
- College football Week 4 overreactions: Too much Colorado hype? Notre Dame's worst loss?
- The U.S. needs minerals for green tech. Will Western mines have enough water?
- Sarah J. Maas books explained: How to read 'ACOTAR,' 'Throne of Glass' in order.
- Bachelor Nation's Gabby Windey and Girlfriend Robby Hoffman Share Insight Into Their Rosy Romance
- Sam Howell's rough outing vs. Bills leaves hard question: Do Commanders have a QB problem?
- China goes on charm offensive at Asian Games, but doesn’t back down from regional confrontations
Recommendation
This was the average Social Security benefit in 2004, and here's what it is now
32 things we learned in NFL Week 3: Bewilderment abounds in Cowboys' loss, Chargers' win
Sly Stallone's 'Expendables 4' belly flops with $8.3M, while 'Nun 2' threepeats at No. 1
Top Chef champion partners with Hidden Valley to create Ranch Chili Crunch, a new, addictive topping
Federal appeals court upholds $14.25 million fine against Exxon for pollution in Texas
A Known Risk: How Carbon Stored Underground Could Find Its Way Back Into the Atmosphere
Joe Burrow starts for Bengals vs. Rams after being questionable with calf injury
Trump lawyers say prosecutors want to ‘silence’ him with gag order in his federal 2020 election case