MAdison, Wis. — The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday decided to consider two challenges to a 175-year-old law that conservatives maintain that bans abortion without letting the cases go through lower courts.
Abortion advocates have an excellent chance of prevailing in both cases, given the high court’s liberal bias and note a liberal justice made during the campaign about how it supports abortion rights.
Wisconsin legislators enacted laws in 1849 that were widely interpreted as prohibiting abortion in all cases except to save the life of the mother. The US Supreme Court’s landmark decision, Roe v. Wade’s 1973 legalization of abortion nullified the statutes, but lawmakers never repealed them. The high court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade Wade reactivated them.
Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul filed a lawsuit challenging statutes in 2022, arguing that they were too old to apply and that a 1985 law allowing abortion before the fetus can survive outside the womb supersedes them. A Dane County judge governed last year that statutes prohibit attacking a woman in an attempt to kill her fetus, but do not prohibit abortion. The ruling encouraged Planned Parenthood to resume offering abortions in Wisconsin, after halting procedures when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, asked the state Supreme Court in February to annul the decision without allowing an appeal to go through the state’s lower appellate courts. He argued that the ruling will have a statewide impact and guide lawmakers and that the case will end up in the Supreme Court anyway.
Days after Urmanski filed his request, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin sued Urmanski and asked the Supreme Court to take it directly. The organization is seeking a ruling that the The statutes of 1849 are unconstitutional, arguing that the state constitution’s declaration that people have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness means that women have the right to control their own bodies — essentially asking the court to declare a constitutional right to abortion.
The court issued orders indicating that the justices voted unanimously to accept Urmanski’s appeal and voted 4-3 to accept the Planned Parenthood case. The court’s four liberal justices voted to accept the case, and the three conservative justices voted against accepting it.
Urmanski’s attorneys, Andrew Phillips and Matthew Thome, did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
Convincing the court’s liberal majority to uphold the statutes seems nearly impossible. Liberal judge Janet Protasiewicz went so far as to openly declare during her campaign that she supports abortion rights, a big departure for a judicial candidate. Typically, these candidates avoid talking about their personal opinions because they fear they may appear biased in court.
The conservative justices accused the liberal majority in their Planned Parenthood dissents of playing politics.
“The signal to an attentive public is that when certain political issues touch the right nerve, this court will follow the party line, not the law,” Hagedorn wrote.
Liberal Justice Jill Karofsky responded by agreeing that the state Supreme Court should decide important state constitutional questions.
“Regardless of one’s views on the morality, legality, or constitutionality of abortion, it is undeniable that the regulation of abortion is an issue with immense personal and practical significance for many Wisconsinites,” Karofsky wrote.
Michelle Velasquez, chief strategy officer for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said in a statement that the organization was grateful the court agreed to take the case and that Wisconsin residents need to know whether abortion is legal in the state.
Wisconsin Watch, a media outlet, obtained a leaked draft of the case acceptance order last week, prompting Chief Judge Annette Ziegler to call for an investigation.
Anti-abortion groups criticized the Supreme Court’s decision to take up the Planned Parenthood case.
“All Wisconsinites should be troubled by this blatant weaponization of the judicial system to enshrine death on demand,” Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said in a statement.
This story originally appeared on Time.com read the full story
