The State of Mississippi has filed papers with the U.S. Supreme Court, requesting that it overturns the infamous 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling, which all but legalised abortion on demand across the United States.
The brief was filed by Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, who said: “A lot has changed in the five decades since [Roe vs. Wade]”, which “shackles states to an outdated view of facts and prevents them from protecting legitimate interests in the context of current science and culture…
“I ask the Court to set things right and return abortion policy to the political branches, where debate can flourish and [where] the will of the people can be discerned at the ballot box.”
Michael Robinson, SPUC Director of Communications, said: “Overturning the disgraceful Roe vs. Wade ruling would be a great win for the pro-life movement.
“Criticism of Mississippi’s Attorney General reveals the contempt that pro-abortion advocates have for democracy. They want extreme pro-abortion policies to exist across the country, even in states where the majority of people fundamentally oppose the killing of unborn babies.”
This will be the first major abortion case to be heard since the introduction of three conservative and purportedly pro-life Supreme Court judges by former President Donald Trump.
Viability of a foetus has “no constitutional basis”
Attorney General Fitch’s arguments revolve around the concept of “viability”, which the law understands as a specific gestational age. However, Fitch argues that the viability rule is subjective and has “no constitutional basis”.
Hence, Roe vs. Wade is not constitutional, says Fitch.
Planned Parenthood abortionist Dr. Colleen McNicholas testified in 2019 that “viability is a complicated medical construct. There is no particular gestational age.”
Medical advancements have meant that the gestational age marker for viability has improved from 28 weeks to 22 weeks in recent times.
As Fitch’s brief states: “Legislatures should be able to respond to those advances, which they cannot do in the face of flawed precedents that are anchored to decades-stale views of life and health.”
Right to privacy does not mean the right to kill
The brief also takes aim at Roe vs. Wade’s claim that abortion should be permitted because Americans have a “right to privacy”. Fitch argues that: "Abortion cannot be justified by a right of privacy or a right to make important personal decisions…
“Nowhere else in the law does a right of privacy or right to make personal decisions provide a right to destroy a human life.”
SPUC’s Mr. Robinson said: “While the killing of innocent human beings by abortion can never be justified, even in the name of democracy, the ruling in Roe vs. Wade has prevented pro-life legislators in many states from introducing legal protection for unborn babies. Mississippi’s stand against Roe, if backed up by the Supreme Court, would be a huge step in the right direction. It is high time this barbaric and anti-democratic ruling was thrown out.
“This month, SPUC reported on a U.S. study that found that women living near an abortion clinic are much more likely to have an abortion.
“Women considering abortion in pro-life states – states that would likely ban abortion if Roe vs. Wade is overturned – would not be so willing to kill their unborn children if they were required to travel to a pro-abortion state.
“While the outcome of Fitch’s brief is by no means certain, should Mississippi be successful, it would undoubtedly save thousands, if not millions, of lives in pro-life states.”
Similar stories
Louisiana votes to ensure no right to abortion, including funding
Daniel Frampton: President Trump, Abortion and the U.S. Election
Pro-life opportunity for Trump as pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg dies