Supreme Court hears Mississippi abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade: LIVE UPDATES
The U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday heard a challenge to a Mississippi law that bans abortions after 15 weeks.
Coverage for this event has ended.
Washington Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers told Fox News Wednesday she is "hopeful" modern developments in science and technology will help turn public opinion on abortion.
"I am hopeful that as people really consider the science, the research, the technology, that more and more are going to review their position on this question," she said in answer to whether she believes the majority of Americans support overturning Roe v. Wade. "It’s the sharpest soul-searching question before us as a nation."
Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley condemned Democratic comments as "really dangerous" as the Supreme Court prepares to review the precedent set for abortion rights under Roe v. Wade.
"We’re seeing a predictable ramp-up already in rhetoric from Democrats, including Democratic senators about how it will be a revolution if the court overturns Roe," he told Fox News. "This is really inappropriate and dangerous rhetoric."
"Really dangerous," he added.
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor rejected the idea that a fetus that has the ability to move and react to pain is a human life that should be protected from abortion.
"Virtually every state defines a brain death as death," Sotomayor, appointed by former President Barack Obama, said during oral arguments in a potential landmark abortion rights case Wednesday, as the state of Mississippi defended an abortion restriction law that directly challenges Roe v. Wade.
"Yet, the literature is filled with episodes of people who are completely and utterly brain dead responding to stimuli," Sotomayor continued. "There's about 40 percent of dead people who, if you touch their feet, the foot will recoil. There are spontaneous acts by dead brain people. So I don't think that a response to -- by a fetus necessarily proves that there's a sensation of pain or that there's consciousness."
Pro-life and pro-choice protesters who gathered outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning told Fox News why they came to protest, with one saying abortions save lives, while others said they kill humans.
"I'm here today because I think that abortion hurts both the unborn and it hurts women," an anti-abortion activist told Fox News.
In contrast, a pro-choice supporter said: "I'm here today because I believe that a woman's right to choose her future, her destiny, her reproductive health care, is a fundamental right."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is under fire for tweeting a photo of a protester's sign outside the Supreme Court Wednesday that protrayed abortion as "rad."
The Supreme Court ended oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization on Wednesday. The case centers on a Mississippi law which bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, earlier than the current legal standard, which prohibits abortion bans prior to fetal viability, about 23 to 24 weeks into pregnancy.
Abortion rights activists are concerned the decision by the majority-conservative Supreme Court could overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark ruling limiting government restrictions on abortion.
President Biden on Wednesday said he supports and "will continue to support" Roe v. Wade, as the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case posing potentially the most consequential challenge to the 1973 landmark ruling that limited government restrictions on abortion.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. The state of Mississippi is arguing that the Supreme Court should allow it and other states to ban abortion after 15 weeks. More specifically, it is asking the high court to strike down a lower court’s decision blocking its 15-week abortion ban from taking effect.
Rep. Cori Bush said women should have abortion access without a fight, the Missouri Democrat told Fox News outside the Capitol on Wednesday.
"We always have to fight for the things that we shouldn't even have to ask for," Bush told Fox News after she gathered with around 35 fellow House Democrats supporting abortion rights. Among them was Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado, a Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus co-chair who was heard shouting, "Abortion is essential."
Lawmakers on the Hill remain divided after the Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in a case that questions a near 50-year precedent set under Roe v Wade.
Congressional leaders have dubbed the case – Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health – the "most consequential abortion case in decades."
"If SCOTUS overturns Roe v. Wade millions will lose access to abortion care & decades of precedent will be overturned," Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., tweeted.
Republicans are sticking to their guns as well and have championed the case as a way forward in overturning the controversial precedent.
"Roe v. Wade was a bad decision, and the Supreme Court acted far outside of the Constitution when it created this precedent nearly 50 years ago," Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said. "Our country was founded on the right to life, a right that should be extended to unborn children."
Both sides of the abortion debate offered their reactions to oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The highly contentious case is a potential game changer for both sides of the movement since it could undo decades of precedent on the issue.
"The pro-life movement should rejoice with how the SCOTUS oral argument went," said Roger Severino, a former Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) official in the Trump administration.
From Fox News' Bill Mears:
Instead of the usual majority opinion, I think the Court is prepared to offer a plurality opinion—perhaps a 3-3-3 vote with Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett offering a more nuanced decision.
So any plurality ruling would mean Roe would neither be struck down in its entirety or upheld in its entirety.
That plurality would say Mississippi’s 15-week ban can be enforced, and that the “viability” standard from Roe v Wade no longer governs, and no longer will be the constitutional standard.
Roe guarantees abortions pre-viability, usually at about 24 weeks. The court will say the Mississippi is not an "undue burden " -- the standard set in the 1992 Casey case -- since women could still have an abortion up to 15 weeks. 90% of abortions are performed in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, per the CDC.
The court for now will sidestep whether earlier state bans -- 12 weeks and 6 weeks (the Texas heartbeat law) can stand.
The court only will only address the specifics of the 15 week Mississippi law and it was clear the conservatives on the court were ready to make dramatic changes limiting abortion rights.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., has joined the growing ranks of members of Congress in issuing a warning to the Supreme Court: reaffirm Roe v. Wade or else.
The "else" varies from promises to pack the court to personal accountability for justices. For Shaheen, it is a promise of "revolution."
It is the latest demand that the justice yield to popular demand or any countervailing interpretation of the Constitution. Or else.
"So you say you want a revolution." However, these threats are an attack on the very concept of impartial judicial review. "When you talk about destruction" of our traditions of judicial review, as the Beatles declared in 1968, "you can count me out."
Threatening the Supreme Court has become something of a required public exhibition of faith for Democrats, a demonstration that abstract notions like judicial independence will not distract from achieving political results.
Click here to read more on Fox News.
The U.S. Capitol Police says its officers are arresting protesters for blocking roads near the Supreme Court.
"We are giving roughly 40 demonstrators warnings to stop violating DC Code § 22–1307- Crowding, Obstructing or Incommoding near First Street, NE and Constitution Avenue," the USCP said in a tweet Wednesday.
"We have given the demonstrators three warnings and are now arresting them for violating DC Code § 22–1307- Crowding, Obstructing or Incommoding in an area where protesting is prohibited," it added a few minutes later. "This does not affect the lawful demonstrators who are in front of the U.S. Supreme Court."
First Street immediately in front of the Supreme Court was blocked off by police, including at the intersection of First Street SE and East Capitol Street NE -- that is where lawful demonstrators were protesting since the morning.
The USCP alert indicates the demonstrators were obstructing traffic near Constitution Avenue, which was not closed to traffic. That intersection is approximately a block north of the Supreme Court.
Oral arguments in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ended shortly before noon Wednesday after nearly two hours of arguments.
Many believe the case is the most important abortion litigation in the last 40 years.
The fate of the case -- and the Roe v. Wade abortion precedent -- now rests in the hands of the court's nine justices.
A decision will likely come sometime in the spring.
Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Stephen Breyer clashed over the role the Supreme Court has in overturning its own precedents Wednesday during arguments in a major Mississippi abortion case.
The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, has the potential to overturn Roe v. Wade.
"History tells a somewhat different story, I think, than is sometimes assumed," Kavanaugh said about stare decisis -- the principle that the court should stick to its past rulings.
"If you think about some of the most important cases in this court's history... there's a string of them where the cases overruled precedent," he said.
Kavanaugh continued: "Brown v. Board outlawed separate but equal. Baker versus Carr, which set the stage for one person, one vote. West Coast Hotel, which recognized the state's authority to regulate business. Miranda versus Arizona, which required police to give warnings... about the right to remain silent... Lawrence v. Texas said that the state may not prohibit same sex conduct. Mapp v. Ohio, which held that the exclusionary rule applies to state criminal prosecution."
"In each of those cases... and I could go on. And those are some of the most consequential and important in the court's history, the court overruled precedent," Kavanaugh said.
A few minutes later Breyer slammed Kavanaugh for making allegedly false equivalencies between Roe and the other cases he cited.
"They do not include the list that Justice Kavanaugh had here... There are complex criteria that she's talking about that link to the position in the rule of law of this court," Breyer said. "All I would say is tou have to read them before beginning to say whether they are overruling or not overruling in the sense meant there calling for special concern."
Breyer was referring to the opinion of former Justice Sandra Day O'Conner in Planned Parenthood v. Casey analyzing when to overturn major precedents.
U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar agreed.
"This is actually another key distinction from the cases that Justice Kavanaugh was referring to," she said. "The decision to overrule nevertheless, perhaps based on the... conclusion that the justices thought the case was wrongly decided in the first instance, would run counter to the ability of stare decisis to function as a cornerstone of the rule of law."
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito addresses the audience during a lecture Thursday, Sept. 30, 2021 at the University of Notre Dame Law School in South Bend, Indiana. (Michael Caterina /South Bend Tribune via AP)
Justice Saumel Alito grilled a pro-choice lawyer during oral arguments in a major abortion case Wednesday over whether using viability as the threshold for when a state can ban abortion is a valid standard.
"What would you say to the argument that has been made many times by people who are pro-choice and pro-life, that the line really doesn't make any sense -- that it is, as Justice Blackman himself described it, arbitrary?" Alito asked Center for Reproductive Rights counsel Julie Rikelman.
Alito argued that a woman has the same interest in terminating a pregnancy after the viability line is crossed and that, "the fetus has an interest in having a life" both before and after viability.
"In some people's view it doesn't, your honor" Rikelman replied. "It is principled because in ordering the interests at stake, the court had to set a line between conception and birth."
The case the court is hearing is about a Mississippi abortion law that bans abortion after 15 weeks -- before viability.
Chief Justice John Roberts Wednesday questioned the lawyer challenging a Mississippi abortion law about why its ban on abortion after 15 weeks doesn't give women enough time to choose to terminate a pregnancy.
"If you think that the issue is one of choice -- that women should have a choice to terminate their pregnancy -- that supposes that there is a point at which they've had the fair choice, opportunity to choice," Roberts said. "And why would 15 weeks be an inappropriate line? Viability, it seems to me, doesn't have anything to do with choice. But if it really is an issue about choice, why is 15 weeks not enough time?"
Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer Julie Rickelman replied that changing the standard for when states can ban abortions would create a slippery slope.
"The state has conceded that some women will not be able obtain an abortion before 15 weeks and this law will bar them from doing so," she said. "Without viability, there will be no stopping point. States will rush to ban abortion at virtually any point in pregnancy."
Roberts, however, said that most other countries ban abortion after 15 weeks, and that the U.S. is in the company of North Korea and China in allowing late-term abortions.
Julia Rikelman, left, in 2018 with Cynthia Blumenthal and Lourdes Rivera at the Center For Reproductive Rights 2018 Gala at Jazz at Lincoln Center in New York City. (Photo by Lars Niki/Getty Images for Center For Reproductive Rights)
Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer Julie Rikelman said Wednesday at Supreme Court oral arguments over a Mississippi abortion law that abortion is critical for a woman's rights and participation in society.
"Mississippi's ban on abortion two months before viability is flatly unconstitutional under decades of precedent," she said in her opening statement. "Preserving a woman's right to make this decision until viability protects her liberty while logically balancing the other interests at stake... Eliminating or reducing the right to abortion will propel women backwards."
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked the lawyer defending a Mississippi law restricting abortion Wednesday whether the Supreme Court can ban abortion -- and the lawyer said it can't.
"To be clear, you're not arguing that the court somehow has the authority to itself prohibit abortion or that this court has the authority to order the states to prohibit abortion, as I understand it? Correct?" Kavanaugh asked Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart.
Stewart said that is correct.
"As I understand it, you're arguing that the Constitution's silent and therefore neutral on the question of abortion. In other words, that the Constitution's neither pro-life nor pro-choice?" Kavanaugh said.
Stewart also agreed with that statement.
Chief Justice John Roberts said Wednesday that he is concerned other precedents of the Supreme Court will be at risk if the court overturns Roe v. Wade.
"There are a lot of cases around the time of Roe, not of that magnitude, but the same type of analysis that that went through exactly the sorts of things we today would say were erroneous," Roberts said. "If we look at it from today's perspective, it's going to be a long list of cases that we're going to say were wrongly decided."
Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart replied that "other controversial areas, or once controversial areas, are quite settled, clear rules, and don't have those considerations against them."
The court "won't have to go down that road," he added.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor said Wednesday in oral arguments over a Mississippi abortion law that she's concerned about a political "stench" that may linger if the court overturns Roe v. Wade.
"Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts? I don't see how it is possible," she said, regarding the possibility of the court overturning Roe v. Wade.
"I think the concern about appearing political makes it absolutely imperative that the court reach a decision well-grounded in the Constitution," Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart said.
FILE - U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis)
Justice Sonia Sotomayor clashed with Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart at Supreme Court oral arguments Wednesday over when a fetus can feel pain.
Stewart said that advancing science since Roe v. Wade in the 1970s and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in the 1990s -- including on fetal pain -- bolsters his argument for overturning those cases. But Sotomayor tried to poke holes in his arguments, including on whether science about when an unborn baby can feel pain is as clear as Stewart says.
"Virtually every state defines a brain death as death. Yet the literature is filled with episodes of people who are completely and utterly plain shredded, responding to stimuli," Sotomayor said. "So I don't think that a response to buy a fetus necessary proves that there's a sensation of pain or that there's consciousness. So I go back to my question of, what has changed in science to show that the viability line is not a real line, that a fetus cannot survive?"
"What I'd say is this Justice Sotomayor, is that the fundamental problem with viability -- it's not really something that rests on science so much. It's that viability is not tethered to anything in the Constitution. In history or tradition. It's a quintessentially legislative line," Stewart said.
Sotomayor shot back that even the idea that the Supreme Court has the final word in disputes isn't in the Constitution, but derrived from it.
"In Casey and in Roe, the court said there is inherent in our structure that there are certain personal decisions that belong to individuals. The states can't intrude on them," Sotomayor said. "None of those things are written in the Constitution. They have all, like Marbury versus Madison, been discerned from the structure of the Constitution."
Sotomayor later asked, "How is your interest anything but a religious view? The issue of when life begins has been hotly debated by philosophers since the beginning of time. It's still debated in religions. So when you say this is the only right that takes away from the state the ability to protect a life, that's a religious view, isn't it?"
Stewart replied that, "Those are all reasons to return this to the people because the people should get to debate these hard issues."
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., told Fox News' Matt Wall she is "optimistic" the Supreme Court will uphold Roe v. Wade in the critical Mississippi abortion case being argued Wednesday.
"Feeling optimistic, inspired," she said. "There's so many people around the country who have come here to talk about why we must not allow reproductive justice, reproductive freedom ... for people to be turned back ... to the days of unsafe abortions."
Lee is the co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus.
Justice Stephen Breyer Wednesday asked Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart why the Supreme Court should disregard "stare decisis" -- the principle that the court should follow its past rulings -- and overturn Roe v. Wade as Mississippi is asking the court to do.
"They say Roe special but special," Breyer said, citing the Supreme Court's opinion in the case Planned Parenthood v. Casey. "They say it's a rare. They call it a watershed. Why? Because the country is divided, because feelings are running high and yet the country, for better or for worse, decided to resolve their differences by this court, laying down a constitutional principle in this case."
Stewart answered that Roe and Casey should be overturned because they are extraordinarily wrong, and meet the high standard for overturning a previous case.
"The last 30 years, workability, developments in the law, factual developments that states can't account for," Stewart said, citing what he says are problems with the court's abortion jurisprudence.
Pro-abortion rights activist Alicia Hurt holds a placard during a protest outside the Supreme Court building, ahead of arguments in the Mississippi abortion rights case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, in Washington, Dec. 1, 2021. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
Justice Clarence Thomas Wednesday pressed the lawyer for Mississippi over the distinction between a right to abortion and a right to privacy, which the 1973 Roe v. Wade case cited to ground a right to abortion in the Constitution.
"You focus on the right to abortion, but our jurisprudence seems to seem to focus on in Casey, autonomy, in Roe privacy. Does it make a difference that we focus on privacy or autonomy or more specifically on abortion?" Thomas asked.
Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart replied: "Yes, the Constitution does provide certain protect certain aspects of privacy, of autonomy and the like. But this court said in Glucksberg, going directly from general concepts of autonomy, of privacy, of bodily integrity to, to a right, is not how we traditionally -- this court traditionally does due process analysis."
An anti-abortion activist attends a protest outside the Supreme Court building, ahead of arguments in the Mississippi abortion rights case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, in Washington, Dec. 1, 2021. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
The Supreme Court began its oral arguments over a Mississippi abortion law at 10 a.m. Wednesday. Many believe the case could lead to the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
A photo of a fake "People" magazine cover skewering Justice Brett Kavanaugh at a protest outside the Supreme Court on Dec. 1, 2021, ahead of arguments in a major abortion case.
Protesters for and against a controversial Mississippi abortion law being argued at the Supreme Court toted colorful signs Wednesday at the crowded protests in front of the court's steps.
"Pregnant People," one side on the pro-choice side of the police barricade read, featuring an image of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. "SEXIST MAN ALIVE."
"Meet the political hack who brings mediocrity and misogyny to the highest court in the land!" it added.
On the pro-life side, one sign read: "The 70's called, they want their ruling back."
Roe v. Wade, the abortion precedent many predict could be overruled by the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case, was decided in 1973.
Another sign said, "Stop calling violence feminism."
Meanwhile, Christian protesters brought signs showing images of aborted babies, including one that showed the hand of an aborted baby on top of a penny for scale. Other folks, meanwhile, held signs with Bible verses and taunted the pro-choice protesters.
One woman walked into the pro-choice crowd and called them "wicked" and accused them of "murder." She and another man got into a tense argument with the pro-choice demonstrators, one of whom was carrying a sign that said, "Ruth sent me."
Fox News' Andrew Murray and Sam Dorman contributed to this report.
Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., and March for Life President Jeanne Mancini were among the high-profile pro-life activists at the rally at the Supreme Court Wednesday, before the justices consider a major Mississippi abortion case.
"I think we've got the best chance that we've had in decades," to overturn Roe, Boozman told Fox News. "I know everybody here is hoping and praying that we get a good result, good outcome, and the judges will rule in favor of the states having this authority."
Asked whether he is concerned Democrats might move to pack the Supreme Court if Roe is overturned, Boozman said
"I don't think you can make decisions based on things like that," he said. This is the right thing, and we'll fight whatever fallout is there... I think we've got a good chance to move in the right direction and if they decide to do some crazy things like that we'll have more rallies, we'll push back and we'll overcome that."
Mancini also told Fox News she is confident the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade this time around.
"This particular law and the makeup of the Supreme Court justices, we've got more originalists on the bench than we've had in many, many years," she said. "And that combination, including as well public opinion, were seeing that, you know, the United States laws are way out of touch with even mainstream America."
Mancini added: "Not only do I see sort of like the legal things lining up for hopeful success of this, but just the influence of public opinion."
Fox News' Tyler Olson and Andrew Murray contributed to this report.
Hundreds of pro-life and pro-choice protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court on a sunny but chilly December morning Wednesday before the justices hear Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization -- the abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade.
Pro-life demonstrators appeared to slightly outnumber those there to support Roe. Police were present but there was little clashing between the two groups. They were separated by barricades, though members of the crowd could easily walk around them.
Pro-life activists chanted slogans including "We are the pro-life generation and we will abolish abortion" and "Hey hey, ho ho, Roe v. Wade has got to go."
Signs from the pro-choice activists read "abortion is healthcare" and "abortion is essential."
The crowd was more tense on the pro-choice side of the barricades, where a pro-life protester taunted the pro-choice crowd. Speaking into a bullhorn, she called them "wicked" and accusing them of committing "murder."
The pro-choice crowd aimed to drown her out with chants of “Whose choice? Our choice. Whose decision? Our decision?”
Fox News' Sam Dorman contributed to this report.
Pro-life and pro-choice members of Congress are bracing for a critical day in the United States' decades-long abortion debate Wednesday when the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case with the potential to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 48-year-old precedent that guarantees a right to an abortion.
The justices will sit for oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case over a Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks. The case is highly anticipated in light of the new 6-3 Republican-appointed majority on the Supreme Court, and people on both sides of the debate believe Roe could be in jeopardy.
"I believe this court will take up the legal arguments, will take up the scientific examination, and will relook at Roe v. Wade in a whole new way," Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., said in a press conference Tuesday.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Tuesday that GOP-backed laws like the one in Mississippi are "clearly unconstitutional, designed to overturn decades of established precedent."
"We have a court, which is putting in doubt" the law of the land for half a century, Hoyer added, lamenting that the Supreme Court justices would even hear such a case. He said it "flies in the face of years of precedent by challenging Roe v. Wade."
Click here to read more on Fox News.
Anti-abortion and pro-abortion rights activists are separated by a barrier as they protest outside the Supreme Court building, ahead of arguments in the Mississippi abortion rights case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, in Washington, December 1, 2021. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
Crowds of protesters will descend on the Supreme Court Wednesday as the justices hear arguments in a case on a Mississippi abortion ban that may consider the most important litigation on the issue since Roe v. Wade.
Large demonstrations are common outside of the court when it hears major cases, especially on animating social issues like abortion.
As early as Tuesday night, a group of pro-life activists was praying in front of the court.
The scope of abortion in the U.S. is at stake Wednesday as the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, potentially the most consequential challenge to the 1973 Roe. v. Wade landmark ruling that limited government restrictions on abortion. Here are some key details about the case and what you can expect:
What's happening?
The state of Mississippi will be arguing that the Supreme Court should allow it and other states to ban abortion after 15 weeks. More specifically, it's asking the court to strike down a lower court's decision blocking its 15-week abortion ban from taking effect. Passed in 2018, Mississippi's law encountered a legal challenge from Jackson Women's Health Organization, an abortion clinic that claims Mississippi's law is unconstitutional and should be permanently blocked because it violates previous court decisions on the issue.
What's at stake?
Mississippi is asking the court to overturn longstanding abortion precedent in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey – two landmark cases that prevented state governments from banning abortions at certain points during pregnancy. In doing so, it could radically alter the landscape of abortion access as many red states are prepared to quickly pass laws permitting further restricting access. Several states, for example, have passed "trigger laws" designed to immediately restrict abortion once the Supreme Court overturns Roe.
Click here to read more on Fox News.
Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves believes his state's abortion ban has a solid chance of succeeding at the Supreme Court, arguing that advances in scientific knowledge have bolstered the case against abortion since Roe v. Wade was decided.
"I believe that the science has changed," he told Fox News during an exclusive interview on Tuesday. "Here's what we know about a child at 15 weeks. We know that that child has a heartbeat. We know that that child pumps multiple quarts of blood every single day. We know that that baby is developing its lungs. We know that that baby can squeeze its hands, its fingers. And we know that that baby can feel pain."
His comments came on the eve of the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, which involves a challenge to his state's 15-week ban on abortions.
Click here to read more on Fox News
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., issued a warning to the Supreme Court days before oral arguments in a potential landmark abortion case, claiming that a "revolution" will take place if the high court overturns existing precedent.
During a virtual event Monday featuring New Hampshire's entire House and Senate delegation, WMUR reporter Adam Sexton had asked if public debate over abortion had "muted" due to many people in the U.S. only knowing life post-Roe v. Wade.
Shaheen asserted that nothing would be muted about the reaction to a possible overturning of that decision.
Click here to read more on Fox News.
Former Vice President Mike Pence called on the Supreme Court to overturn the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, arguing that it has destabilized the nation for decades.
Speaking at the National Press Club Tuesday, Pence declared that prior decisions incorrectly determined that abortion was key to the nation's stability.
"The truth is nothing has been more destabilizing in our society for the last 50 years than legalized abortion … I believe it's no coincidence that the last half century has seen a persistent rise in family instability, single-parent households, a decline in family formation, increase in unplanned pregnancies, and an explosion in sexually transmitted disease," he said.
Click here to read more on Fox News.
Mississippi’s attorney general, who will be defending her state's 15-week abortion ban before the U.S. Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade challenge this week, urged the high court to overturn the existing precedent that "has pitted women against their children" and return the power to the states.
Mississippi has become the center of national attention as the Supreme Court prepares to consider oral arguments on Dec. 1 surrounding the state's law prohibiting abortions after 15 weeks.
The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, presents the court with the opportunity to overturn the landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion nationwide.
Click here to read more on Fox News.
Former U.S. Justice Department official John Yoo discusses the Supreme Court case challenging Roe v. Wade on Fox News @ Night.
He tells host Shannon Bream the justice to watch is Brett Kavanaugh.
Click here to watch video on Fox News.
Live Coverage begins here