Current:Home > reviewsWisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -ProfitPioneers Hub
Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
View
Date:2025-04-16 16:57:21
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landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it.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 He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point.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! (58359)
Related
- Finally, good retirement news! Southwest pilots' plan is a bright spot, experts say
- Family caregivers of people with long COVID bear an extra burden
- In Charleston, S.C., Politics and Budgets Get in the Way of Cutting Carbon Emissions
- 4 pieces of advice for caregivers, from caregivers
- Questlove charts 50 years of SNL musical hits (and misses)
- Famed mountain lion P-22 had 2 severe infections before his death never before documented in California pumas
- The Biggest Bombshells From Anna Nicole Smith: You Don't Know Me
- Fixing the health care worker shortage may be something Congress can agree on
- North Carolina trustees approve Bill Belichick’s deal ahead of introductory news conference
- Millions Now at Risk From Oil and Gas-Related Earthquakes, Scientists Say
Ranking
- Are Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp down? Meta says most issues resolved after outages
- Harvard Medical School morgue manager accused of selling body parts as part of stolen human remains criminal network
- Why Corkcicle Tumblers, To-Go Mugs, Wine Chillers & More Are Your BFF All Day
- Medicare announces plan to recoup billions from drug companies
- Which apps offer encrypted messaging? How to switch and what to know after feds’ warning
- We asked for wishes, you answered: Send leaders into space, free electricity, dignity
- Here are the 15 most destructive hurricanes in U.S. history
- One state looks to get kids in crisis out of the ER — and back home
Recommendation
Paula Abdul settles lawsuit with former 'So You Think You Can Dance' co
Harvard Medical School morgue manager accused of selling body parts as part of stolen human remains criminal network
Selena Gomez Is Serving Up 2 New TV Series: All the Delicious Details
Regulators Demand Repair of Leaking Alaska Gas Pipeline, Citing Public Hazard
Opinion: Gianni Infantino, FIFA sell souls and 2034 World Cup for Saudi Arabia's billions
Another Cook Inlet Pipeline Feared to Be Vulnerable, As Gas Continues to Leak
Taylor Lautner “Praying” for John Mayer Ahead of Taylor Swift’s Speak Now Re-Release
Is Your Skin Feeling Sandy? Smooth Things Over With These 12 Skincare Products