“The high court’s refusal to review Indiana’s appeal… left standing a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision that invalidated the measure. The action also rejected requests by some organizations that the justices reconsider their 1973 Roe v. Wade opinion.” - BPNews
“As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” (Proverbs 27:17)
High court upholds only part of Indiana pro-life law
Since 2005
Image
Discussion
NewHmmmm
The decision regarding the disposal of fetal remains is very promising; what it means is that a fairly minor increase in the cost of “providing” an abortion does not impose an unreasonable burden on those seeking it. It’s significant that all but Sotomayor and Ginsburg agreed.
Regarding the other part, I haven’t read the decision, but I regard the law banning abortion incentivized by sex, race, and the like to be an “unforced error” on the part of the Indiana legislature. Not that there is anything morally defensible about abortion for sex, race, and the like, but as long as abortion remains legal, anyone who has the standard 9 week ultrasound and finds out the sex of their baby can abort and tell the provider “none of your business” when asked why. So it’s something you really cannot police.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.