Quantcast
Connect with us

US lawyers who have had abortions file Supreme Court brief

Published

on

More than 360 American women who have had abortions and work in the legal profession, including several high-profile attorneys, have filed a brief with the Supreme Court ahead of a closely watched abortion case.

“I write because I want the Court to know how access to safe and legal abortion made my law career possible and changed my life,” said one of the 368 signatories to the brief filed with the court on Monday.

ADVERTISEMENT

The nine-member Supreme Court is to hear a challenge in March to a restrictive abortion law in the state of Louisiana.

The law requires doctors at Louisiana abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles (50 kilometers) of where the procedure is being carried out.

Abortion rights advocates say this restriction would force the closure of most of the state’s clinics, leaving it with just one doctor authorized to perform abortions.

The Supreme Court’s deliberations will come in the middle of the 2020 presidential campaign — and its eventual ruling will be the first significant decision on the hot-button issue since President Donald Trump appointed Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, shifting the court’s balance to the right.

The signatories to the brief include female attorneys with prominent law firms around the country, law school professors, retired judges, law school students and others in the legal profession.

ADVERTISEMENT

They recounted their personal experiences with abortion and the circumstances which led them to undergo the procedure.

“Identifying myself publicly brings me fear of reprisal from my colleagues and my broader community in South Carolina, many of whom are deeply religious and against abortion,” one woman said. “I suspect that many would (and will) see me differently — as morally inferior — upon learning that I have had an abortion.”

The women said in the brief that they were “certain that they would not have been able to realize their personal and/or professional goals were it not for their ability to control their reproductive lives.”

ADVERTISEMENT

They were coming forward — “some at immeasurable personal and professional cost” — to ensure that women have “all that the Constitution and the Court have rightfully promised them,” they said.

The Supreme Court legalized abortion in 1973 but anti-abortion groups have made repeated efforts to roll it back since then.

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump’s push to reopen schools appears to be blowing up in his face: polls

Published

on

President Donald Trump has been adamant that schools reopen in the fall, although he has given little to no guidance for how to do so in a way that won't lead to further eruptions of the novel coronavirus.

However, Business Insider reports that the president's rush to get schools open may already be coming back to bite him.

As evidence, the publication cited several national polls that show opposition to Trump's plans.

"A Politico/Morning Consult national tracking poll released on Wednesday found that 53% of voters oppose 'fully reopening' daycares and K-12 schools, 50% oppose a full reopening of colleges and universities, and 65% oppose Trump's threats to pull federal funding from schools that don't re-open," Business Insider writes.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Scientists fear the US could be battered by a second pandemic while still fighting COVID-19: report

Published

on

When health experts warn about the possibility of the United States suffering a “double whammy” with coronavirus, they are likely referring to two COVID-19 waves: the first wave (which has recently taken a turn for the worse in many Sun Belt states) followed by a possible second wave later this year in the fall and the winter. That’s how the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918/1919 behaved: it was brutal during the spring but even more brutal when a second wave killed millions in the fall and the winter. But in a July 15 article for The Atlantic, journalist Ed Yong describes a different type of double whammy scenario: one in which the U.S. continues to be battered by COVID-19 while a separate coronavirus emerges and inflicts widespread misery.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

WATCH: Homeless man begs for mercy during ‘brutal attack’ by NYC cop — and then gets charged with felony assault

Published

on

Body cam video shows a New York City police officer punching and dragging a homeless man off a subway train in May. But according to The City, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance is charging the homeless man with felony assault for allegedly slapping the officer’s hand away while the cop tried to cuff him.

"Joseph T., 30, who asked that his last name not be used because he fears retaliation, left a Manhattan homeless shelter with his belongings in a few tote bags. He got tired of waiting for a bed, huddled with others in the entrance area, he said," The City reports. "It was around 12:30 a.m. on May 25, according to a criminal complaint, when police approached Joseph because, Officer Shimul Saha said, he was 'occupying more than one seat' on the near-empty No. 6 train. Joseph left the car and moved to the next one."

Continue Reading
 
 
You need honest news coverage. Help us deliver it. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image