Page 28 - Constitution Doesn T News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Continue because the constitution is neutral, that this court should be neutral on the question of the abortion, neither pro-choice or pro-life. but because they say the constitution doesn't give us the authority we should leave it to the states and we should be very neutral on the question and that they are saying here, i think, that we should return to a position of neutrality on that contentious social issue rather than continuing to pick sides on that issue. so i think that's at a big picture level their argument. i want to give you a chance to respond to that. >> yes, a few points if i ma...

Had were wrongfully decided and then making it right and overturning the decision. he goes back to the issue at neutrality and said the constitution doesn't say anything about the issue of abortion. so shouldn't the court be neutral and it leave it to the state and leave it to the people to decide this and it came back to the idea of the court being an arbiter of neutrality. and because he argues that the constitution doesn't actually say anything, they leave it to the state. it definitely sounds like the majority of the conservative justices are willing to look at upholding the mississippi la...

Whether mississippi's law that says apart from medical emergencies you can't have an abortion after 15 weeks whether that can stand it runs completely opposed to the current standard of abortion law, which says you can't forbid abortion before viability but i think the court may take this opportunity to reconsider that because we know those underlying cases of roe v. wade and planned parenthood vs. casey just aren't consistent with what the constitution does which is leave that question to the states. ainsley: so are they saying? -- what hangs in the balance here no more abortions or no aborti...

Would be something then that each state could make its own call on. this divisive issue would go back to the american people where it belongs. ainsley: that's what bill mcgurn is saying. go back to the states. what pro-lifers want from the supreme court it's the job of the american people not the justices to decide abortion. do you agree with that? >> yeah. the justices were never meant to be legislators coming up with their best policy goals. they weren't to be de facto unelected medical board for the country. they should be deciding what the law and the constitution says. the constitution do...

0 standard of self-has proved difficult to administer and that is relevant to the analysis. and i want to give you an opportunity to respond. >> yes, your honor. the first point i'd like to make is the undue burden test is not at issue in this case. that is the test that applies to regulations, not prohibitions. and the state has conceded that this is a prohibition. that's the title of this law. an act to prohibit abortion after 15 weeks. the only thing at issue in this case is the viability line, and the viability line has been enduringly workable. the lower federal courts have applied it con...