By Breitbart. Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron (R) is leading 17 states in the filing of an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in support of an Indiana law that requires parents to be informed when their child is granted court approval for an abortion without their consent.
WDRB reported Cameron argues in the brief for Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky that states have an interest in protecting minors who are considering having an abortion.
We cannot allow abortion to pre-determine the characteristics of an entire generation. By passing HB 5 last year, Kentucky made it clear we won’t stand for discriminatory abortions, & we have a duty to assist other states by defending similar laws.
— Attorney General Daniel Cameron (@kyoag) January 24, 2020
As Breitbart News reported on January 2, Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill (R) asked the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a measure signed into law in 2017, but never enacted, that requires parents to be notified when a minor who is granted court approval for an abortion, is about to have the procedure.
“Nothing in the U.S. Constitution prohibits Indiana from requiring parental notification when an unemancipated minor is getting an abortion,” Hill said in a press statement. “Even to get a tattoo, a minor in Indiana needs parental permission. Quite simply, parents have rights and responsibilities in the care and upbringing of a child.” (Read more from “Kentucky Attorney General Leads 17 States in Potential SCOTUS Abortion Case” HERE)
Abortion Debate Returns to the Roberts Court
By SCOTUS Blog. When he ran for president in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump promised that, if elected, he would appoint “pro-life” Supreme Court justices, which would result in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision establishing a woman’s right to an abortion. In the three years since taking office, Trump has put two new justices on the bench: Justice Neil Gorsuch, who filled the vacancy created after the February 2016 death of Justice Antonin Scalia, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was confirmed in October 2018 after the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy. On March 4, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a challenge to the constitutionality of a Louisiana law regulating abortion. Although the case does not directly implicate Roe, the justices’ ruling may signal what direction the Roberts Court is likely to take in future abortion cases.
The law at the center of the dispute is known as the Louisiana Unsafe Abortion Protection Act. Enacted in June 2014, it requires doctors who perform abortions in the state to have the right to admit patients to a hospital within 30 miles of the place where the abortion is performed. In 2016, in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the Supreme Court struck down a similar law from Texas, which that state had defended on the ground that it was intended to protect the health of pregnant women. In the wake of Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, the vote was 5-3: Justice Anthony Kennedy and the court’s four more liberal justices agreed that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting the health of pregnant women. (Read more from “Abortion Debate Returns to the Roberts Court” HERE)