monumental issues. in closing i would say in the ferguson case the justice emphasized there is no caste system here. it took 58 years for the court to recognize that. the greatest decision this court reached. we are oef running on 50 years of roe. it is a very wrong decision that inflicted tremendous damage on our country and continue to do so and take human lives until the court overrules it. we want the court to uphold the state s law. the case submitted. thank you. the honorable court is now adjourned until monday next at 10:00. harris: we watched history in the making perhaps one way or the other, we don t know which way the justices will decide on the mississippi law
the state isn t asking the court to replace it with a clear 15 week line for the right. they re asking the court to reverse the liberty interest all together or leave it up in the air. if that were to happen immediately states with six and eight weeks and 10 week bans would seek to enforce those with no continued guidance what the skoefpt liberty interest is going forward. the thing that is at issue before us today is 15 weeks. and i just wonder what the strength of your reliance arguments, which sounded to me like being based on a total prohibition, would be if there isn t a total prohibition. as far as viability goes, i don t see what that has to do with the question of choice at all. i think as casey emphasized in reaffirming the viability line the court justified that as having a biological justification that marks the point in pregnancy when the fetus is capable of life.
some states may continue to enact laws in the piece of the court s precedence has never been enough of a troen to overrule and true for a number of decisions the court issued. the fact that some people continue to disagree with them is not precedent to discard it. back to my original question. if i know your interest here is in abortion. i understand that. but if i were to ask you what constitutional right protects the right to abortion, is it privacy, is it autonomy? what would it be? it s liberty, your honor, the protection in the 14th amendment that a state can t deprive a person of liberty without due process of law and the court has interpreted liberty to include the right to
law with a view a woman s role was wife and mother and why it s appropriate to do the historical analysis at a higher level of generality. can it be said the right to abortion is deeply rooted in the history and traditions of the american people? yes, it can. again founding women were able to end their pregnancy under the common law and this court in glux berg discussed casey as a decision based on history and tradition and note 19 called out and relied on roe s conclusion that at the time of the founding and well into the 1800s women had the ability to end a pregnancy. what was the principle source court relied on for roe historical analysis. who was the author of that article. i don t remember the author. i know the court spent many pages of the opinion doing a historical analysis and a brief on behalf of several key
the analysis goes wrong in reliance on the safe haven laws is overlooking the consequences of forcing a woman upon her the choice of having to decide whether to give a child up for adoption. that itself is its own monumental decision for her. there is nothing new about the safe haven laws or nothing new about the availability of adoption as an attorney. roe and casey took account of that fact and the bodily integrity interests we refer to but the autonomy interests retain in force as well. the reliance interests and the right to be able to choose to terminate the pregnancy rather than having to terminate the parental rights. that s part of it yet. for many women it is a very difficult choice but one this court for 50 years has recognized must be left up to them based on their beliefs and their conscience and what s