Supreme Court snubs UN human rights experts during abortion case oral arguments
(Washington, D.C. – C-Fam) The Supreme Court ignored claims from human rights experts and academics that abortion is an international human right during oral arguments in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case.
The justices of the Supreme Court did not raise any questions about international human rights law during oral arguments in the Dobbs case even though UN human rights experts petitioned the court to overturn Mississippi’s ban on abortions carried out after the 15th week of pregnancy, the moment when children in the womb can feel pain.
The snub leaves open the question of how, if at all, the justices view international human rights law. Even though the justices did not assess international law claims during oral arguments, it does not mean the justices are not giving thought to international human rights law. On the contrary, a brief exchange between Supreme Court Justice John Roberts and Julie Rikelman, the attorney of the Center for Reproductive Rights representing the Mississippi abortion group, gave a glimpse of what the justices may discuss between themselves in coming weeks and months.
In what may prove to be a revealing moment, Chief Justice Roberts said Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban was not “dramatic” since it reflected “the standard that the vast majority of other countries have.”
Article continues below
Dear Reader,
Have you ever wanted to share the miracle of human development with little ones? Live Action is proud to present the "Baby Olivia" board book, which presents the content of Live Action's "Baby Olivia" fetal development video in a fun, new format. It's perfect for helping little minds understand the complex and beautiful process of human development in the womb.
Receive our brand new Baby Olivia board book when you give a one-time gift of $30 or more (or begin a new monthly gift of $15 or more), and your gift will be DOUBLED to fuel Live Action’s life-saving content.
Chief Justice Roberts notoriously disappointed pro-lifers in the Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellertedt case in 2016. He sided with liberal justices in striking down abortion restrictions because they imposed an “undue burden” on women’s ability to access abortion in Texas. In the Dobbs case pro-lifers hope that he will switch sides, and he certainly gave them some hopes that a switch may be in the works….
Editor’s Note: Stefano Gennarini, J.D. writes for C-Fam. This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-Fam (Center for Family & Human Rights), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (https://c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Guest Column·By Stefano Gennarini, J.D.
