Appeals court upholds Ohio's Down syndrome abortion law
April 13, 2021. Summarized by summa-bot.
Compression ratio: 22.3%. 2 min read.
Jan 18, 2019; Cincinnati, OH, USA; Demonstrators gather to pray and protest during a local gathering in support of the national March for Life event in front of the Planned Parenthood office in the Mt. Auburn neighborhood of Cincinnati on Friday, Jan. 18, 2019. Mandatory Credit: Sam Greene/Cincinnati Enquirer via USA TODAY NETWORK
A US appellate court decision on Tuesday upholding an Ohio law that prohibits abortions because of fetal Down syndrome evades major Supreme Court precedent and is certain to reverberate in cases nationwide.
(CNN)A US appellate court decision on Tuesday upholding an Ohio law that prohibits abortions because of fetal Down syndrome evades major Supreme Court precedent and is certain to reverberate in cases nationwide.
The 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial judge's decision invalidating the Ohio law that bars a physician from aborting a pregnancy when the physician knows the woman has made her choice because of fetal Down syndrome.
In reversing, the appellate court majority said the right to an abortion before a fetus is viable "is not absolute. " The court produced five separate opinions from the judges in the majority, who splintered on some rationale, and six separate dissenting opinions -- for a combined 111 pages.
"We hold that the restrictions imposed, or burdens created, by (the Ohio law) do not create a substantial obstacle to a women's ability to choose or obtain an abortion," Batchelder wrote, minimizing the protections of Supreme Court abortion precedents.
In her separate dissenting opinion, Moore observed that judges in the majority differed on how to interpret Roberts' framework from the Supreme Court's decision in June Medical Services v.
As dissenting judges noted on Tuesday, the 6th Circuit majority ignored Supreme Court cases as recently as 2016 that emphasized the woman's abortion right and that still stand, despite Roberts' 2020 concurrence.
References to the history of eugenics ran throughout the opinions, with Judge Richard Allen Griffin asserting at one point that the Ohio law prevents doctors from complicity in "abortions for eugenic reasons. "
Griffin cited a 2019 opinion by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas that referred to a state's interest in "preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics," and then added, "The same goes for Ohio's law . . .