Linda Greenhouse for the NY Times reports on the arguments heard regarding the constitutionality of a federal law that bans a disputed method of abortion. Among the justices most interested in the medical details was the one whom both sides consider most likely to be in a position to control the outcome, Anthony M. Kennedy.
Justice Kennedy’s questioning suggested that he had not made up his mind, despite his strongly worded dissenting opinion when the court struck down Nebraska’s version of the federal law six years ago, and despite his obvious distaste for the procedure at issue. Instead, his questions suggested that he remained open to persuasion that the law placed doctors in legal jeopardy and imposed an unconstitutional burden on their patients’ right to terminate their pregnancies.
(…)
Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who wrote the court’s decision in the Nebraska case, asked whether the court might rule that the procedure could be used “only where appropriate medical opinion finds it necessary.” Justice Breyer added: “Now, if Congress is right, there will be no such case, so it’s no problem. But if Congress is wrong, then the doctor will be able to perform the procedure and Congress couldn’t object.”
More articles by Brian Zick
FBI Director Mueller Contradicts Gonzales
Brian Zick
Democrats Request Special Counsel Be Appointed to Investigate Perjury Charges Against Gonzales
Brian Zick
Rove and Deputy Jennings Subpoenaed by Senate Judiciary Committee
Brian Zick
Announcing In These Times’ New Agreement with the National Writers Union
Freelance contributors are essential to the quality and success of In These Times and independent media, and this agreement is one way to demonstrate their value to our publication and our commitment to transparency.
For more information about the National Writers Union, visit nwu.org.
Read the full agreement, which reaffirms a floor for the rates of our freelance editorial content, as well as our current rates (which are higher) and submissions guidelines below.