Current:Home > reviewsWisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -MomentumProfit Zone
Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
View
Date:2025-04-16 20:16:55
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landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it.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 He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point.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! (773)
Related
- Which apps offer encrypted messaging? How to switch and what to know after feds’ warning
- 7th Heaven Stars Have a Heartwarming Cast Reunion at '90s Con
- Lamar Odom Reacts to Khloe Kardashian’s Message Honoring Brother Rob Kardashian
- Al Gore talks 'Climate Reality,' regrets and hopes for the grandkids.
- Bodycam footage shows high
- Secret Service, Justice Dept locate person of interest in swatting attacks on DHS Secretary Mayorkas and other officials
- UConn draws region of death: Huskies have a difficult path to March Madness Final Four
- How Chrishell Stause and G Flip Keep Their Relationship Spicy
- Justice Department, Louisville reach deal after probe prompted by Breonna Taylor killing
- N.C. State's stunning ACC men's tournament title could be worth over $5.5 million to coach
Ranking
- Person accused of accosting Rep. Nancy Mace at Capitol pleads not guilty to assault charge
- Police search for gunman in shooting that left 2 people dead, 5 injured in Washington D.C.
- Bodies of 2 men recovered from river in Washington state
- 8-year-old Kentucky boy dies after eating strawberries at school fundraiser: Reports
- Trump invites nearly all federal workers to quit now, get paid through September
- Russia polling stations vandalized as election sure to grant Vladimir Putin a new 6-year term begins
- When is Final Four for March Madness? How to watch women's and men's tournaments
- In Vermont, ‘Town Meeting’ is democracy embodied. What can the rest of the country learn from it?
Recommendation
Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow owns a $3 million Batmobile Tumbler
Mauricio Umansky Shares Dating Update Amid Separation From Kyle Richards
In Ohio campaign rally, Trump says there will be a bloodbath if he loses November election
KC Current's new stadium raises the bar for women's sports: 'Can't unsee what we've done'
Juan Soto praise of Mets' future a tough sight for Yankees, but World Series goal remains
Wisconsin voters to decide on banning private money to help fund elections
Steelers' aggressive quarterback moves provide jolt without breaking bank
In Vermont, ‘Town Meeting’ is democracy embodied. What can the rest of the country learn from it?