Current:Home > ScamsSurpassing Quant Think Tank Center|Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -SecureWealth Bridge
Surpassing Quant Think Tank Center|Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
NovaQuant View
Date:2025-04-10 03:38:26
MADISON,Surpassing Quant Think Tank Center 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landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it.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 He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point.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! (792)
Related
- 'Survivor' 47 finale, part one recap: 2 players were sent home. Who's left in the game?
- Princess Charlotte and Prince George Make Adorable Appearance at King Charles III's Coronation Concert
- How does air quality affect our health? Doctors explain the potential impacts
- Remote work opened some doors to workers with disabilities. But others remain shut
- 'Squid Game' without subtitles? Duolingo, Netflix encourage fans to learn Korean
- East Coast Shatters Temperature Records, Offering Preview to a Warming World
- Is Oklahoma’s New Earthquake-Reduction Plan Enough to Stop the Shaking?
- 'Where is humanity?' ask the helpless doctors of Ethiopia's embattled Tigray region
- DeepSeek: Did a little known Chinese startup cause a 'Sputnik moment' for AI?
- Trump EPA Tries Again to Roll Back Methane Rules for Oil and Gas Industry
Ranking
- A White House order claims to end 'censorship.' What does that mean?
- Pigeon Power: The Future of Air Pollution Monitoring in a Tiny Backpack?
- This 15-minute stick figure exercise can help you find your purpose
- How an on-call addiction specialist at a Massachusetts hospital saved a life
- McConnell absent from Senate on Thursday as he recovers from fall in Capitol
- Visitors at Grand Teton National Park accused of harassing baby bison
- Game, Set, Perfect Match: Inside Enrique Iglesias and Anna Kournikova's Super-Private Romance
- Black Death survivors gave their descendants a genetic advantage — but with a cost
Recommendation
Intel's stock did something it hasn't done since 2022
Why Vanessa Hudgens Is Thinking About Eloping With Fiancé Cole Tucker
A town employee quietly lowered the fluoride in water for years
IRS sends bills to taxpayers with the wrong due date for some
North Carolina trustees approve Bill Belichick’s deal ahead of introductory news conference
There's a spike in respiratory illness among children — and it's not just COVID
Why Vanessa Hudgens Is Thinking About Eloping With Fiancé Cole Tucker
Beto O’Rourke on Climate Change: Where the Candidate Stands