Noon update
Biden to speak to the nation about Supreme Court ruling
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden will speak from the White House on Friday about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
The remarks, which are scheduled for 12:30 p.m. EDT, will outline his approach to this new phase of the fight over abortion access.
The White House has been preparing for this moment since a draft of the decision leaked in May. Officials have been huddling with state leaders, advocates, health care professionals and others to prepare for a future without Roe v. Wade.
Now Biden’s plans will be tested in terms of politics and policy.
Outside the Supreme Court, a crowd of abortion supporters swelled to the hundreds after the ruling was issued. One chanted into a bullhorn, “legal abortion on demand” and “this decision must not stand.”
A competing faction demonstrated in favor of the ruling, holding signs saying “the future is anti-abortion″ and “dismember Roe.”
Biden and other Democrats hope to use outrage over the court decision to rally voters in November’s midterm elections. Although nationwide legislation ensuring access to abortion appears out of reach, more Democratic victories at the state level could limit Republican efforts to ban the practice.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the ruling “is outrageous and heart-wrenching” and fulfills the Republican Party’s “dark and extreme goal of ripping away women’s right to make their own reproductive health decisions.”
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters that he applauds the court decision.
“A lot of lives are going to be saved,” McCarthy told reporters. “But it also goes back to people in the states to have a say in the process.”
Many Republican-controlled states are poised to severely restrict abortion, or even ban it outright.
The White House has been exploring options for Biden to take executive action to safeguard abortion rights, but his options are limited.
Lawrence Gostin, who runs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown Law, said ahead of Friday’s ruling that he expected the Biden administration to be “to be nibbling around the edges, and is not going to do anything really profound.”
Gostin said he’s discussed a variety of options with administration officials but believes they are “gun shy” given the potential for legal challenges that could lead to more roadblocks from a U.S. Supreme Court that’s currently dominated by conservatives.
Some of Gostin’s suggestions included having Medicaid cover the cost of traveling across state lines to end pregnancies, as well as expanding access to abortion medication that can be delivered by mail.
“States couldn’t pick and choose what cancer drug they would allow, and they shouldn’t be permitted to choose what options women have for medication abortions that are fully approved as safe and effective,” he said.
Alexandra LaManna, a White House spokeswoman, said earlier this week that the president “believes we should defend the right of all Americans to make their own decisions,” and she added that Republican policies “include abortion bans with no exceptions for rape or incest, and criminalizing women who have an abortion and the physicians who perform them.”
During their preparations, White House officials have held a series of meetings with advocates, medical groups and faith leaders who are supportive of abortion access.
The Rev. John Dorhauer, the general minister and president of the United Church of Christ, drove from Cleveland to Washington, D.C., to attend one meeting earlier this month. Another virtual meeting was held this week, featuring Vice President Kamala Harris.
“It was rather impressive to see the commitment the White House and the vice president’s office has had to gather advocates from around the country,” Dorhauer said.
However, there are also concerns that the administration is not ready.
Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, attended a recent virtual meeting with abortion providers and said she expects “a true health crisis.”
“I think that we should have been preparing for far longer than we have been,” McNicholas said. “Do I think that they recognize that this a problem? Yes. Do I think that they’re prepared in this moment? No.”
ORIGINAL STORY
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.
The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.
The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.
It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.
Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that reaffirmed the right to abortion, were wrong the day they were decided and must be overturned.
Authority to regulate abortion rests with the political branches, not the courts, Alito wrote.
Joining Alito were Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The latter three justices are Trump appointees. Thomas first voted to overrule Roe 30 years ago.
Chief Justice John Roberts would have stopped short of ending the abortion right, noting that he would have upheld the Mississippi law at the heart of the case, a ban on abortion after 15 weeks, and said no more.
Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — the diminished liberal wing of the court — were in dissent.
The ruling is expected to disproportionately affect minority women who already face limited access to health care, according to statistics analyzed by The Associated Press.
Thirteen states, mainly in the South and Midwest, already have laws on the books that ban abortion in the event Roe is overturned. Another half-dozen states have near-total bans or prohibitions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.
In roughly a half-dozen other states, the fight will be over dormant abortion bans that were enacted before Roe was decided in 1973 or new proposals to sharply limit when abortions can be performed, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.
More than 90% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, and more than half are now done with pills, not surgery, according to data compiled by Guttmacher.
The decision came against a backdrop of public opinion surveys that find a majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe and handing the question of whether to permit abortion entirely to the states. Polls conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and others also have consistently shown about 1 in 10 Americans want abortion to be illegal in all cases. A majority are in favor of abortion being legal in all or most circumstances, but polls indicate many also support restrictions especially later in pregnancy.
The Biden administration and other defenders of abortion rights have warned that a decision overturning Roe also would threaten other high court decisions in favor of gay rights and even potentially, contraception.
But Alito wrote in his draft opinion that his analysis addresses abortion only, not other rights that also stem from a right to privacy that the high court has found implicit, though not directly stated, in the Constitution. Abortion is different, Alito wrote, because of the unique moral question it poses.
Whatever the intentions of the person who leaked Alito’s draft opinion, the conservatives held firm in overturning Roe and Casey.
In his draft, Alito dismissed the arguments in favor of retaining the two decisions, including that multiple generations of American women have partly relied on the right to abortion to gain economic and political power.
Changing the composition of the court has been central to the anti-abortion side’s strategy. Mississippi and its allies made increasingly aggressive arguments as the case developed, and two high-court defenders of abortion rights retired or died. The state initially argued that its law could be upheld without overruling the court’s abortion precedents.
Then-Gov. Phil Bryant signed the 15-week measure into law in March 2018, when Justices Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were still members of a five-justice majority that was mainly protective of abortion rights.
By early summer, Kennedy had retired and was replaced by Justice Brett Kavanaugh a few months later. The Mississippi law was blocked in lower federal courts.
But the state always was headed to the nation’s highest court. It did not even ask for a hearing before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ultimately held the law invalid in December 2019.
By early September 2020, the Supreme Court was ready to consider the state’s appeal.
The court scheduled the case for consideration at the justices’ private conference on Sept. 29. But in the intervening weeks, Ginsburg died and Barrett was quickly nominated and confirmed without a single Democratic vote.
The stage now was set, although it took the court another half year to agree to hear the case.
By the time Mississippi filed its main written argument with the court in the summer, the thrust of its argument had changed and it was now calling for the wholesale overruling of Roe and Casey.
The first sign that the court might be receptive to wiping away the constitutional right to abortion came in late summer, when the justices divided 5-4 in allowing Texas to enforce a ban on the procedure at roughly six weeks, before some women even know they are pregnant. That dispute turned on the unique structure of the law, including its enforcement by private citizens rather than by state officials, and how it can be challenged in court.
But Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in a searing dissent for the three liberal justices that their conservative colleagues refused to block “a flagrantly unconstitutional law” that “flouts nearly 50 years of federal precedents.” Roberts was also among the dissenters.
Then in December, after hearing additional arguments over whether to block the Texas law known as S.B. 8, the court again declined to do so, also by a 5-4 vote. “The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court’s rulings,” Roberts wrote, in a partial dissent.
In their Senate hearings, Trump’s three high-court picks carefully skirted questions about how they would vote in any cases, including about abortion.
But even as Democrats and abortion rights supporters predicted Kavanaugh and Gorsuch would vote to upend abortion rights if confirmed, the two left at least one Republican senator with a different impression. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine predicted Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wouldn’t support overturning the abortion cases, based on private conversations she had with them when they were nominees to the Supreme Court.
Barrett was perhaps the most vocal opponent of abortion in her time as a law professor, before becoming a federal judge in 2017. She was a member of anti-abortion groups at Notre Dame University, where she taught law, and she signed a newspaper ad opposing “abortion on demand” and defending “the right to life from fertilization to natural death.” She promised to set aside her personal views when judging cases.
Trump, meanwhile, had predicted as a candidate that whoever he named to the court would “automatically” vote to overrule Roe.
