Current:Home > InvestWisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -AssetScope
Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
View
Date:2025-04-13 22:17:48
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landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it.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 He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point.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! (43485)
Related
- Why we love Bear Pond Books, a ski town bookstore with a French bulldog 'Staff Pup'
- Missing windsurfer from Space Coast is second Florida death from Idalia
- Aryna Sabalenka, soon to be new No. 1, cruises into U.S. Open semifinals
- Georgia remains No. 1, Florida State rises to No. 5 in US LBM Coaches Poll
- Jamie Foxx gets stitches after a glass is thrown at him during dinner in Beverly Hills
- North Carolina public school students performing better on standardized tests, report says
- Ukraine’s first lady is 'afraid' the world is turning away from war
- Tiny farms feed Africa. A group that aims to help them wins a $2.5 million prize
- Justice Department, Louisville reach deal after probe prompted by Breonna Taylor killing
- Burning Man is ending, but the cleanup from heavy flooding is far from over
Ranking
- Opinion: Gianni Infantino, FIFA sell souls and 2034 World Cup for Saudi Arabia's billions
- 'AGT': Simon Cowell's Golden Buzzer singer Putri Ariani delivers 'perfect act' with U2 cover
- Florida lawmakers denounce antisemitic incidents over Labor Day weekend: 'Hate has no place here'
- War sanctions against Russia highlight growing divisions among the Group of 20 countries
- Chuck Scarborough signs off: Hoda Kotb, Al Roker tribute legendary New York anchor
- The share of U.S. drug overdose deaths caused by fake prescription pills is growing
- Maya Hawke jokes she's proud of dad Ethan Hawke for flirting with Rihanna: 'It's family pride'
- Lidcoin: How much bitcoin does the federal government still hold?
Recommendation
Which apps offer encrypted messaging? How to switch and what to know after feds’ warning
Horoscopes Today, September 5, 2023
Chris Jones' holdout from Chiefs among NFL standoffs that could get ugly in Week 1
Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos Give Glimpse Into Their Summer Vacation With Their Kids—and Cole Sprouse
US wholesale inflation accelerated in November in sign that some price pressures remain elevated
Suspect wanted in 2019 ambush that killed 9 American citizens is arrested in New Mexico
Massachusetts pizza place sells out after Dave Portnoy calls it the worst in the nation
Another twist in the Alex Murdaugh double murder case. Did the clerk tamper with the jury?