Current:Home > NewsWisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid -WealthSync Pro
Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid
ViewDate:2025-04-28 08:26:41
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landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it.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 He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point.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! (52639)
Related
- Where will Elmo go? HBO moves away from 'Sesame Street'
- Why Florida's new immigration law is troubling businesses and workers alike
- DEA moves to revoke major drug distributor's license over opioid crisis failures
- Leading experts warn of a risk of extinction from AI
- Buckingham Palace staff under investigation for 'bar brawl'
- These Secrets About Grease Are the Ones That You Want
- Hailee Steinfeld and Buffalo Bills Quarterback Josh Allen Turn Up the Heat While Kissing in Mexico
- Victor Wembanyama's Security Guard Will Not Face Charges After Britney Spears Incident
- The Super Bowl could end in a 'three
- New Faces on a Vital National Commission Could Help Speed a Clean Energy Transition
Ranking
- Civic engagement nonprofits say democracy needs support in between big elections. Do funders agree?
- Exxon’s Long-Shot Embrace of Carbon Capture in the Houston Area Just Got Massive Support from Congress
- Inside Clean Energy: Three Charts to Help Make Sense of 2021, a Year Coal Was Up and Solar Was Way Up
- Facebook, Instagram to block news stories in California if bill passes
- Grammy nominee Teddy Swims on love, growth and embracing change
- Eva Mendes Shares Rare Insight Into Her and Ryan Gosling's Kids' “Summer of Boredom”
- Duke Energy Is Leaking a Potent Climate-Warming Gas at More Than Five Times the Rate of Other Utilities
- Supreme Court sides with Jack Daniel's in trademark dispute with dog toy maker
Recommendation
Nearly half of US teens are online ‘constantly,’ Pew report finds
Can ChatGPT write a podcast episode? Can AI take our jobs?
Grimes used AI to clone her own voice. We cloned the voice of a host of Planet Money.
John Mayer Cryptically Shared “Please Be Kind” Message Ahead of Taylor Swift Speak Now Release
Juan Soto to be introduced by Mets at Citi Field after striking record $765 million, 15
Inside Clean Energy: In Parched California, a Project Aims to Save Water and Produce Renewable Energy
¿Por qué permiten que las compañías petroleras de California, asolada por la sequía, usen agua dulce?
'Like milk': How one magazine became a mainstay of New Jersey's Chinese community