Supreme Court tosses ruling that forced government to provide abortions for illegal immigrants

On June 4th, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision to toss out a lower court ruling against the government in Azar v. Garza, a case for “Jane Doe,” an illegal immigrant minor seeking an abortion with the backing of the ACLU. As Ed Whelan explained at National Review:

[T]he Supreme Court granted the Department of Justice’s petition for certiorari of the en banc D.C. Circuit’s ruling in her favor and vacated that ruling on the ground that the abortion that the minor obtained rendered the case moot.

USA Today reported Doe already had her abortion, and is no longer in federal custody after being released to a sponsor. She aborted her baby last October, and the Court made news in January for considering this case, as reported by Live Action News.

The Washington Post notes, “The action, which came in an unsigned opinion without noted dissents, throws out a precedent that might allow other teenagers in the same circumstance to obtain an abortion.”

But Doe’s decision was not without consequence. Her preborn child died (presumably in the late first trimester), and, as Live Action News previously reported, Doe sought mental health treatment afterward. The Department of Justice also alleged that the ACLU misled the government on the timeline of when Doe was seeking her abortion.

1st Trimester Surgical Abortion: Suction (Aspiration) D & C

But the ACLU didn’t stop there. Doe was not the only pregnant minor taken advantage of by the organization. According to the Washington Post:

In March, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan imposed an order stopping the government from “interfering with or obstructing” access to all “pregnancy-related care” for teens detained in immigration custody.

Chutkan’s order also allowed the case to proceed as a class action on behalf of any other teens in custody who may want abortion services. In 2017, there were at least 420 pregnant unaccompanied minors in custody, including 18 who requested abortions.

The Supreme Court’s decision, interestingly, is being lauded by both pro-life and pro-abortion advocates. In a Facebook post, the Charlotte Lozier Institute mentions in part that “[w]hile this remains an ongoing issue, a dangerous precedent has been avoided.” Pro-abortion media outlets, such as Slate and the New York Times, however, are celebrating the Court’s decision not to punish the ACLU for misleading the federal government.

Consequences to Doe’s mental health, as well as the ACLU’s pro-abortion focus only adds to the history of the abortion movement’s lack of offering real healthcare and support to pregnant women, just as in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.