In a pivotal discussion on the "Strict Scrutiny" podcast, speakers Kate Shaw, Leah Litman, Melissa Murray with guests Adeel Mangi, Ted Cruz, and Sherrilyn Ifill delve into the ramifications of a recent Alabama Supreme Court decision. This ruling classifies frozen embryos as individuals, thereby sparking legal and ethical concerns about in vitro fertilization (IVF) practices and reproductive rights. The episode dissects the impact of this decision on clinics and the broader implications for 14th Amendment rights, touching on the intersection of theology and legislation within the court's ruling.
Additionally, the podcast navigates the potential use of the Comstock Act as a legal tool to enforce a federal abortion ban, exploring perspectives from various Republican figures who may influence future legislation on fetal personhood. This examination foregrounds the broader conservative agenda, hinting at a considerable policy shift that could take place under a Republican administration. The speakers also scrutinize the possible curtailment of 14th Amendment protections within the context of the Supreme Court's current conservative makeup, highlighting the justices' approaches to significant civil liberties and anti-discrimination cases.
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
The decision by the Alabama Supreme Court to treat frozen, unimplanted embryos as "extrauterine children" under wrongful death laws has significant consequences for IVF treatments and reproductive rights. Clinics fear legal and civil repercussions, leading to a pause in IVF services. The court's deliberation intersects with overarching 14th Amendment considerations, threatening to invalidate legislative measures that regulate or permit IVF.
Chief Justice Tom Parker justifies the decision, drawing on a "theologically based view of the sanctity of life," indicating his support for governing based on conservative Christian principles. Parker's stance, shared during a broadcast with evangelist Johnny Enlow, reflects the broader conservative movement's endeavor to establish fetal personhood, placing additional restrictions on reproductive rights. This move is consistent with the conservative agenda to reshape reproductive rights, exemplified by the court's insinuation that freezing embryos might equate to child abuse or endangerment.
The possibility of employing the 1873 Comstock Act as a federal abortion ban by a future Republican administration without Congress is reviewed. The act, overlooked as an abortion prohibition, could be repurposed as a sweeping federal ban. Jonathan Mitchell, the legal mind behind Texas's SB8 law, views this strategy as feasible given the current Supreme Court's composition, and he advocates for understanding fetuses as persons under state wrongful death statutes, thus promoting fetal personhood.
Republican presidential hopefuls, including Senator Tommy Tuberville, Nikki Haley, and Senator Tim Scott, have articulated or shown interest in federal personhood advancements. Their remarks indicate that the topic is gaining traction within Republican circles, mapping out a potential policy shift should they assume power.
The Supreme Court, with positions expressed by Justices Alito and Thomas, hints at a leaning towards curtailing the 14th Amendment's protections. Justice Alito's dissent in a sex discrimination case underscores his stance on how religious rights may conflict with anti-discrimination laws. This sentiment coincides with concerns Alito and Thomas have regarding the Obergefell v. Hodges decision on same-sex marriage, signaling their openness to reconsider this and other decisions that broaden the scope of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Their viewpoints suggest that the current conservative composition of the court could lead to a significant reassessment of basic 14th Amendment protections in areas such as voting rights and same-sex marriage.
1-Page Summary
The Alabama Supreme Court has issued a decision with far-reaching implications for IVF and reproductive rights, embracing an interpretation of fetal personhood that places new legal considerations on unimplanted embryos.
The Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling states that frozen, unimplanted embryos are considered "extrauterine children" under the state's wrongful death of a minor law. The implications of this decision are concerning for IVF treatment and practitioners in Alabama, who now face potential legal and civil liabilities. The plaintiffs were fertility clinic patients who had created more embryos than were implanted—a common practice in IVF due to the uncertainty of implantation success. The court's decision has led many clinics in Alabama to pause IVF treatments amid confusion regarding the legality and future practice of IVF in the state.
The court further acknowledged it was addressing complex questions about the status of extra-uterine embryos under the 14th Amendment and state statutes but resolved the issue under state law. They hinted that their Constitution could prevent IVF and that any legislative attempts to permit or regulate it might be struck down.
Chief Justice Tom Parker wrote separately in agreement with the decision, underscoring the "sanctity of unborn life," including life outside the womb. His opinion implied that a "theologically based view of the sanctity of life," as adopted by Alabamians, asserts that "God made every person in his image."
Chief Justice Parker’s embrace of a theologically based view was further discussed during an online broadcast with evangelist Johnny Enlow. Parker suggested America is meant to be a Christian nation and indicated Alabama's commitment to embody Biblical principles regarding life. Parker's comments align with his reported adherence to the Seven Mountains Mandate, advocating for conservative Christian governance across key socie ...
Alabama Supreme Court Decision Embracing Fetal Personhood and Endangering IVF
Murray and Shaw discuss the potential use of the 1873 Comstock Act as a federal abortion ban by a future Republican administration and the views of architect Jonathan Mitchell in connection with the current Supreme Court.
There is talk of enforcing the 1873 Comstock Act, historically not considered an abortion prohibition, as a means to enact a federal abortion ban by a future administration without the need for Congressional action. The act was previously interpreted to not forbid items used for abortions as long as the sender did not intend them to be used illegally. However, plans are in place to enforce the act for a sweeping ban if the right group gains the presidency, circumventing congressional or judicial need.
Jonathan Mitchell, known as the architect of Texas's SB8 anti-abortion law, suggests employing the Comstock Act as a tool for a federal abortion ban. Notably, Mitchell adds that the current composition of the Supreme Court creates an opportune environment to enforce the Comstock Act without requiring Congress. Mitchell advanced fetal personhood by advocating under Texas's wrongful death statute to establish fetuses as persons under state law—a strategy reflecting his desire to adapt to the Supreme Court's leaning ...
Looming Federal Personhood Developments in Potential Future Republican Administration
The Supreme Court's decisions and opinions from Justices Alito and Thomas suggest a potential shift in how the 14th Amendment's protections are applied, particularly concerning voting rights and same-sex marriage.
While the information for a comprehensive background is not available in the given transcript chunk, the Warren Court, historically known for its progressive rulings, significantly expanded civil rights and the scope of the 14th Amendment. This included strides in voting rights and racial equality.
Justice Alito's dissent regarding a lower court's admissions policy and a case involving a lesbian plaintiff alleging sex discrimination, shows his profound disagreement with the court's direction. Alito's observation that excluding jurors with negative views on homosexuality could be seen as bias against religion underscores his concern about the interplay between religious rights and anti-discrimination laws.
This perspective fits i ...
Court Minimizing 14th Amendment Protections
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser