Current:Home > MyWisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -GrowthInsight
Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
View
Date:2025-04-15 19:03:32
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landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it.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 He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point.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! (441)
Related
- Small twin
- Average rate on 30
- McConnell absent from Senate on Thursday as he recovers from fall in Capitol
- The Grammy nominee you need to hear: Esperanza Spalding
- Don't let hackers fool you with a 'scam
- Stamford Road collision sends motorcyclist flying; driver arrested
- At site of suspected mass killings, Syrians recall horrors, hope for answers
- Have Dry, Sensitive Skin? You Need To Add These Gentle Skincare Products to Your Routine
- Average rate on 30
- New data highlights 'achievement gap' for students in the US
Ranking
- What to know about Tuesday’s US House primaries to replace Matt Gaetz and Mike Waltz
- Are Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp down? Meta says most issues resolved after outages
- Justice Department, Louisville reach deal after probe prompted by Breonna Taylor killing
- Trump suggestion that Egypt, Jordan absorb Palestinians from Gaza draws rejections, confusion
- Man can't find second winning lottery ticket, sues over $394 million jackpot, lawsuit says
- Arkansas State Police probe death of woman found after officer
- This was the average Social Security benefit in 2004, and here's what it is now
- South Korea's acting president moves to reassure allies, calm markets after Yoon impeachment
Recommendation
Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump
Gen. Mark Milley's security detail and security clearance revoked, Pentagon says
Toyota to invest $922 million to build a new paint facility at its Kentucky complex
As Trump Enters Office, a Ripe Oil and Gas Target Appears: An Alabama National Forest
Friday the 13th luck? 13 past Mega Millions jackpot wins in December. See top 10 lottery prizes
Trump's 'stop
New data highlights 'achievement gap' for students in the US
Federal hiring is about to get the Trump treatment