re: Mississippi asks the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade

I read the brief

Mississippi passed a law banning abortions after 15 wks of pregnancy, unless there was a medical emergency.

A hospital sued the state saying the law was unconstitutional pursuant to RvW, which prohibits abortion bans which affect abortions prior to viability of the baby.

Mississippi argued that RvW should not apply bc it should be overruled. They say there’s no basis in the constitution text for creating an abortion right, so there’s no basis for courts to use to understand how the laws relating to abortion should be interpreted. As a result the goalposts keep which prevents any consistent standards. Further, abortion doesn’t relate to privacy interests of family, etc like other Privacy decisions bc abortion involves harming another life or potential life. No other privacy law authorizes harm to another person.

Stare Decisis principles talk about when precedent should be overturned. Mississippi says stare decisis doesn’t prevent overruling RvW bc the decision it relies on old science (regarding viability) and its unworkable to try to apply the law. Further, it argues that removing the Abortion issue from the legislative process, the political discourse is poisoned.

It’s a good brief.

If leftists weren’t rabidly insane over their sacrament - then Mississippi should win. But . . . Wise Latina, Traitorous Roberts - may have other plans