A federal judge has suggested that abortion rights may still be protected by the U.S. Constitution, in spite of the Supreme Court ruling last year that upended decades of precedent protecting the right to abortion.
The CourtāsĀ Dobbs v. Jackson Womenās Health OrganizationĀ ruling last JuneĀ overturned its 1973Ā Roe v. WadeĀ ruling, which recognized the right to have an abortion in every state in the U.S., namely through provisions in the 14th Amendment of the constitution. In theĀ DobbsĀ case, the conservative bloc majority of justices ruled that abortion rights werenāt actually covered under that amendment.
In an order issued on Monday, however, U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly suggested that a different amendment could still require the Court to recognize abortion as a fundamental right.
Kollar-Kotelly, who serves on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is reviewing a case brought by anti-abortion activist Lauren Handy, who was sentenced last year forĀ illegally trespassing at an abortion clinicĀ and obstructing patients from accessing abortion services in late 2021. Handy is appealing that ruling, claiming it is now irrelevant due to the Supreme Courtās ruling that abortion isnāt protected by the 14th Amendment.
Though Handy has argued that the Courtās ruling states that the constitution, in its entirety, doesnāt recognize abortion as a federal right,Ā Kollar-Kotellyās order seems to reject that notion. While abortion is not a federally recognized right at the moment, it could be again, she wrote, noting that other provisions of the constitution could be interpreted as protecting the right.
āOf those provisions that might contain some right to access to such services, the Thirteenth Amendment has received substantial attention among scholars and, briefly, in one federal Court of Appeals decision,āĀ Kollar-Kotelly wrote.
That amendment deals primarily with ending the practice of slavery, but also forbids āinvoluntary servitude.ā
The full text of the amendment reads:
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Koller-Kotellyās order cites a scholarly article written by Northwestern University Law School professor Andrew Koppelman in 1990,Ā which states that, āwhen women are compelled to carry and bear children, they are subjected to āinvoluntary servitudeā in violationā of the 13th Amendment.
At least one other appellate court has provided a precedent for using the 13th Amendment to block abortion restrictions. In 1995, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against a judge that had fined an individual for getting an abortion,Ā citing the 13th Amendment.
Kollar-Kotelly admitted in her order thatĀ DobbsĀ contains language stating that āthe Constitution does not confer a right to abortion.ā But she noted that the statement could have been āheuristic,ā adding that the Court didnāt delve into abortion as it pertained to the constitution beyond the 14th Amendment.
āThe āissueā before the Court in Dobbs was not whether any provision of the Constitution provided a right to abortion,āĀ the district judge wrote. āRather, the question before the Court inĀ DobbsĀ was whether the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution provided such a right. That is why neither the majority nor the dissent inĀ DobbsĀ analyzed anything but the Fourteenth Amendment.ā
Kollar-Kotelly ordered both Handy and prosecutors to submit legal briefs by mid-MarchĀ detailing whether they believed the Supreme Court had indeed ruled that the constitution in its entirety couldnāt be interpreted to recognize abortion rights ā and if they believed the Court had not ruled as such, to indicate which provisions, if any, could recognize such rights.
Kollar-Kotellyās order comes just two weeks after the 50th anniversary of theĀ RoeĀ decision.Ā Polling conducted byĀ NPRĀ and IpsosĀ from late January shows that the vast majority of Americans still disagree with the Supreme Courtās decision to upend that precedent.
According to the polling data, 60 percent of Americans believeĀ RoeĀ was correct while just two in five Americans say they backĀ Dobbs. Sixty-two percent of respondents said the Dobbs decision was rooted in justicesā conservative politics, rather than a just interpretation of laws.
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate
