Current:Home > reviewsWisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -FundConnect
Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
View
Date:2025-04-28 00:19:33
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landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it.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 He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point.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! (9384)
Related
- The FTC says 'gamified' online job scams by WhatsApp and text on the rise. What to know.
- A man accused of torturing women is using dating apps to look for victims, police say
- Tesla slashed its prices across the board. We're now starting to see the consequences
- Can you drink too much water? Here's what experts say
- Biden administration makes final diplomatic push for stability across a turbulent Mideast
- The Beigie Awards: All about inventory
- Craft beer pioneer Anchor Brewing to close after 127 years
- Zoom is the latest tech firm to announce layoffs, and its CEO will take a 98% pay cut
- Mets have visions of grandeur, and a dynasty, with Juan Soto as major catalyst
- Exxon Pledges to Reduce Emissions, but the Details Suggest Nothing Has Changed
Ranking
- Skins Game to make return to Thanksgiving week with a modern look
- COVID test kits, treatments and vaccines won't be free to many consumers much longer
- As the Livestock Industry Touts Manure-to-Energy Projects, Environmentalists Cry ‘Greenwashing’
- Blackjewel’s Bankruptcy Filing Is a Harbinger of Trouble Ahead for the Plummeting Coal Industry
- Juan Soto praise of Mets' future a tough sight for Yankees, but World Series goal remains
- Travelers can save money on flights by skiplagging, but there are risks. Here's what to know.
- New Research Explores the Costs of Climate Tipping Points, and How They Could Compound One Another
- Amazon Shoppers Say These Gorgeous Gold Earrings Don't Tarnish— Get the Set on Sale Ahead of Prime Day
Recommendation
Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people
The Indicator Quiz: Inflation
Gas stove makers have a pollution solution. They're just not using it
Meagan Good Supports Boyfriend Jonathan Majors at Court Appearance in Assault Case
FACT FOCUS: Inspector general’s Jan. 6 report misrepresented as proof of FBI setup
Everything You Need To Know About That $3 Magic Shaving Powder You’re Seeing All Over TikTok
Study: Commuting has an upside and remote workers may be missing out
How Some Dealerships Use 'Yo-yo Car Sales' To Take Buyers For A Ride