[ad_1]
COLUMBUS, Ohio – The anti-abortion movement in Ohio is being encouraged by the US Supreme Court to enact an Indiana law requiring burial or cremation of fetal remains, as a similar law was passed at the Ohio General Assembly.
But the High Court has chosen not to rule on an Indiana law prohibiting women from having an abortion on the basis of sex, race or a fetal disability. This law more directly affects the future of Roe v. Wade, which grants women the right to an abortion.
Advocates of abortion rights are relieved that the court – at least for the moment – seems indifferent to tackling this larger problem.
Questions on abortion: The future of Roe v. Wade and Ohio
An exploration of the post-Roe case v. Wade Ohio, if the US Surpreme Court allows the state to abolish the right to abortion.
Mike Gonidakis, President of Ohio Right to Life, said the court's decision on the Indiana Cremation and Burial Act shows that judges consider fetuses to be human.
"They send a strong signal: this is the most pro-life court of the generation," he said. It's a slam dunk? No, but for the first time in a generation, the Supreme Court has an unexpected chance. What we continue to do is to remind at home that it is an unborn child. "
Jessie Hill, a law professor and a lawyer with Case Western Reserve, a representative of many abortion providers in Ohio, said she suspected the Supreme Court of Canada was not safe. to attack the case Roe v. Wade for a year or two.
"She again refused to ask more questions about the right to abortion that was involved," she said. "I think the court is not eager to take the question, it certainly could have gone otherwise, it could have taken both questions, it could have written a great opinion, it could have reconsidered Roe."
The Senate Act No. 27 on the interment and cremation of fetuses is Bill 27. The abortion service provider must dispose of human remains or be subject to criminal prosecution.
The bill was passed by the Ohio Senate. It is currently being studied in a committee of the House.
The Ohio Senate passes a bill requiring the burial and cremation of fetus remains after an abortion
Under Senate Bill 27, women decided in writing whether their fetal remains were buried or cremated after a surgical abortion. Abortion providers may face a first degree offense if they do not meet the requirement.
"I am pleased with the decision of the US Supreme Court to support ethical and dignified treatment of fetus remnants," said SB 27, Cincinnati Republican Senator Joe Uecker, a statement.
Freda Levenson, legal director of the Ohio ACLU, said the US Supreme Court's decision in the Indiana case was close. She just answered the question of whether there is a legitimate interest on the part of the state to regulate the elimination of fetal tissue.
If the Ohio General Assembly approves 27 HBs, state abortion providers could take legal action, forcing a court to answer another common issue raised in abortion lawsuits: would the law constitute it is an "undue burden" for women seeking an abortion, she said.
"We hope this question will get a different answer because it's a burden," she said. "It's a huge expense, which would increase the cost of abortions."
Ohio is challenging in court a law that resembles Indiana's "discriminatory" abortion ban, except that it prohibits abortion only if the fetus has the syndrome. of Down and that is why a woman chooses to end her pregnancy.
In January, a panel of three judges of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeal heard arguments on the ban on Down syndrome. The court has not yet made a decision.
Lawyers dispute if a doctor would know of a diagnosis of Down syndrome before abortion
Three federal appeals judges heard arguments Wednesday on the advisability of overturning the decision of a lower court to put abortion law on hold caused by Down syndrome in Ohio.
On Tuesday, the US Supreme Court did not touch Indiana law, which was overturned by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals – a different calling region that does not cover Ohio.
Depending on how the 6th Circuit rules on Ohio's ban on Down syndrome, there could be a split with the 7th circuit, which means the US Supreme Court could take a case in Ohio to resolve differences of opinion.
If the 6th Circuit lifts the ban on Down syndrome in Ohio, which Levenson ACLU of Ohio believes he can do, then there would be no conflict or reason for the Supreme Court to reconsider the ban. .
Separately, the constitutionality of the ban on fetal "fetal heart" abortion is subject to legal recourse, which, if it comes into force, would prohibit abortions in Ohio approximately six weeks later, before many women do not realize that they are pregnant.
The lawsuit concerning fetal heartbeats was filed about 10 days ago. The legislature passed the bill in April and Governor Mike DeWine signed it shortly thereafter.
The Ohio ACLU, Preterm-Cleveland and others are suing for a preliminary blocking of the law, which will take effect July 11. The complainants then want a permanent block. The state is fighting to defend the law.
The Federal Court of First Instance agreed not to make oral argument at the plaintiffs' request. He has set a briefing schedule for each party and will decide, based on the legal arguments presented, to grant a preliminary blocking before July 11, said Levenson, of the ACLU of Ohio.
[ad_2]
Source link