SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Participants hold signs during a "Hold The Line For Abortion Justice" rally at the U.S. Supreme Court on December 1, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Leigh Vogel/Getty Images for Women's March Inc)
'This Is Horrific': US Supreme Court Keeps 6-Week Abortion Ban in Place
"The Supreme Court has no value of our bodies, lives, and futures," said one advocacy group. "We need to liberate abortion."
Dec 10, 2021
This is a developing story and may be updated.
Reproductive rights advocates on Friday expressed outrage after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Texas' six-week abortion ban can remain in effect--a ruling that will continue to force Texans to travel out of state to obtain care at clinics which have reported surging demand, or to continue their unwanted pregnancies.
"The Supreme Court has no value of our bodies, lives, and futures," tweeted Physicians for Reproductive Health, a national advocacy group. "We need to liberate abortion."
The group repeated calls made in recent months for the passage of the Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA), which would ensure people in every state in the U.S. have the right to obtain abortion care regardless of whether the high court overturns Roe v. Wade--as it's being asked to do by Mississippi officials in a case regarding the state's 15-week forced-pregnancy law.
The Supreme Court justices ruled 5-4 in favor of allowing the Texas law to stand for the time being; a federal court is expected to be asked to block the law again.
The court also ruled 8-1 that abortion providers can proceed with their lawsuit challenging the law, known as Senate Bill 8, which deputizes ordinary citizens who can win at least $10,000 in court after suing anyone who has "aided or abetted" a patient who obtains an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.
"S.B. 8 has caused untold harm--forcing those who can afford it to travel out of state for the care they need, and those who can't to remain pregnant against their will," said NARAL Pro-Choice America. "As it stands, S.B. 8 makes accessing abortion care in Texas nearly impossible. And the Supreme Court should have blocked it."
In her dissent joined in part by the other two liberal judges on the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the court "should have put an end to this madness months ago," instead of allowing the law to go into effect in September.
Sotomayor dissented "from the court's dangerous departure from its precedents, which establish that federal courts can and should issue relief when a state enacts a law that chills the exercise of a constitutional right."
The court's ruling "betrays not only the citizens of Texas, but also our constitutional system of government," the justice wrote.
Stand Up America, which has advocated for Supreme Court expansion, said the right wing-dominated court's continued attacks on reproductive rights make the case for adding seats to the court via the Judiciary Act.
"The conservative supermajority of the Supreme Court demonstrated once again today that they are nothing more than right-wing political operatives appointed to the bench to do one thing: roll back fundamental rights long-guaranteed by our Constitution and a Supreme Court that once endeavored to uphold them," said Christina Harvey, executive director of the group.
"Today's decision made clear the need for Congress and President Biden to act on Supreme Court expansion--for the sake of rebalancing the ideological scale of the Court and protecting our fundamental rights," she added.
Progressive lawmakers added their voices to the call for the passage of the House-approved WHPA--and the elimination of the legislative filibuster to allow it to pass in the Senate.
"Texans have been living the back and forth of this case for months. It doesn't have to be this way," tweeted the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "Congress can ensure that every American, no matter where they live, has access to abortion."
"It's the filibuster or reproductive freedom," the caucus added.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
This is a developing story and may be updated.
Reproductive rights advocates on Friday expressed outrage after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Texas' six-week abortion ban can remain in effect--a ruling that will continue to force Texans to travel out of state to obtain care at clinics which have reported surging demand, or to continue their unwanted pregnancies.
"The Supreme Court has no value of our bodies, lives, and futures," tweeted Physicians for Reproductive Health, a national advocacy group. "We need to liberate abortion."
The group repeated calls made in recent months for the passage of the Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA), which would ensure people in every state in the U.S. have the right to obtain abortion care regardless of whether the high court overturns Roe v. Wade--as it's being asked to do by Mississippi officials in a case regarding the state's 15-week forced-pregnancy law.
The Supreme Court justices ruled 5-4 in favor of allowing the Texas law to stand for the time being; a federal court is expected to be asked to block the law again.
The court also ruled 8-1 that abortion providers can proceed with their lawsuit challenging the law, known as Senate Bill 8, which deputizes ordinary citizens who can win at least $10,000 in court after suing anyone who has "aided or abetted" a patient who obtains an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.
"S.B. 8 has caused untold harm--forcing those who can afford it to travel out of state for the care they need, and those who can't to remain pregnant against their will," said NARAL Pro-Choice America. "As it stands, S.B. 8 makes accessing abortion care in Texas nearly impossible. And the Supreme Court should have blocked it."
In her dissent joined in part by the other two liberal judges on the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the court "should have put an end to this madness months ago," instead of allowing the law to go into effect in September.
Sotomayor dissented "from the court's dangerous departure from its precedents, which establish that federal courts can and should issue relief when a state enacts a law that chills the exercise of a constitutional right."
The court's ruling "betrays not only the citizens of Texas, but also our constitutional system of government," the justice wrote.
Stand Up America, which has advocated for Supreme Court expansion, said the right wing-dominated court's continued attacks on reproductive rights make the case for adding seats to the court via the Judiciary Act.
"The conservative supermajority of the Supreme Court demonstrated once again today that they are nothing more than right-wing political operatives appointed to the bench to do one thing: roll back fundamental rights long-guaranteed by our Constitution and a Supreme Court that once endeavored to uphold them," said Christina Harvey, executive director of the group.
"Today's decision made clear the need for Congress and President Biden to act on Supreme Court expansion--for the sake of rebalancing the ideological scale of the Court and protecting our fundamental rights," she added.
Progressive lawmakers added their voices to the call for the passage of the House-approved WHPA--and the elimination of the legislative filibuster to allow it to pass in the Senate.
"Texans have been living the back and forth of this case for months. It doesn't have to be this way," tweeted the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "Congress can ensure that every American, no matter where they live, has access to abortion."
"It's the filibuster or reproductive freedom," the caucus added.
This is a developing story and may be updated.
Reproductive rights advocates on Friday expressed outrage after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Texas' six-week abortion ban can remain in effect--a ruling that will continue to force Texans to travel out of state to obtain care at clinics which have reported surging demand, or to continue their unwanted pregnancies.
"The Supreme Court has no value of our bodies, lives, and futures," tweeted Physicians for Reproductive Health, a national advocacy group. "We need to liberate abortion."
The group repeated calls made in recent months for the passage of the Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA), which would ensure people in every state in the U.S. have the right to obtain abortion care regardless of whether the high court overturns Roe v. Wade--as it's being asked to do by Mississippi officials in a case regarding the state's 15-week forced-pregnancy law.
The Supreme Court justices ruled 5-4 in favor of allowing the Texas law to stand for the time being; a federal court is expected to be asked to block the law again.
The court also ruled 8-1 that abortion providers can proceed with their lawsuit challenging the law, known as Senate Bill 8, which deputizes ordinary citizens who can win at least $10,000 in court after suing anyone who has "aided or abetted" a patient who obtains an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.
"S.B. 8 has caused untold harm--forcing those who can afford it to travel out of state for the care they need, and those who can't to remain pregnant against their will," said NARAL Pro-Choice America. "As it stands, S.B. 8 makes accessing abortion care in Texas nearly impossible. And the Supreme Court should have blocked it."
In her dissent joined in part by the other two liberal judges on the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the court "should have put an end to this madness months ago," instead of allowing the law to go into effect in September.
Sotomayor dissented "from the court's dangerous departure from its precedents, which establish that federal courts can and should issue relief when a state enacts a law that chills the exercise of a constitutional right."
The court's ruling "betrays not only the citizens of Texas, but also our constitutional system of government," the justice wrote.
Stand Up America, which has advocated for Supreme Court expansion, said the right wing-dominated court's continued attacks on reproductive rights make the case for adding seats to the court via the Judiciary Act.
"The conservative supermajority of the Supreme Court demonstrated once again today that they are nothing more than right-wing political operatives appointed to the bench to do one thing: roll back fundamental rights long-guaranteed by our Constitution and a Supreme Court that once endeavored to uphold them," said Christina Harvey, executive director of the group.
"Today's decision made clear the need for Congress and President Biden to act on Supreme Court expansion--for the sake of rebalancing the ideological scale of the Court and protecting our fundamental rights," she added.
Progressive lawmakers added their voices to the call for the passage of the House-approved WHPA--and the elimination of the legislative filibuster to allow it to pass in the Senate.
"Texans have been living the back and forth of this case for months. It doesn't have to be this way," tweeted the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "Congress can ensure that every American, no matter where they live, has access to abortion."
"It's the filibuster or reproductive freedom," the caucus added.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.