The Supreme Court’s top justice has verified that a leaked document claiming that millions and millions of US women may lose their legal access to abortion is authentic.
However, according to John Roberts, it does not reflect the court’s final ruling.
The disclosure has raised hopes that the 1973 ruling legalizing abortion in the United States may be reversed, enabling individual states to prohibit it.
President Joe Biden has stated that if the judgment is made, it might jeopardize other liberties.
The leaked paper, dubbed “1st Draft,” seems to represent the court’s majority conclusion.
The 1973 Roe v Wade decision, which legalised abortion in the United States, is described as “egregiously wrong only from the outset” by Justice Samuel Alito.
The new draft is not a final decision, and people’s minds may change. However, if Roe v Wade is repealed, over half of the states in the United States might prohibit abortion.
Chief Justice Roberts called the draft leak, which was first reported by the US website Politico, “a unique and egregious violation” in a statement, and requested the Supreme Court Marshal to initiate an inquiry.
He said that the court’s work will “not be harmed in any way.”
Both parties have reacted strongly to the publishing of the document. Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion litigation firm, asked the court to overlook “pro-abortion campaigners’ or surrogate media supporters’ expectations.”
Planned Parenthood, the nation’s biggest network provider of reproductive health care, has said that it would “fight like hell to safeguard the right to safe, legal abortion.”
It claims that if Roe v Wade is overturned, 36 million women will lose access to abortion.
Mississippi has asked for the order to be reversed, and the court is anticipated to make a decision in late June or early July.
Thirteen states have already approved so-called trigger laws that, if Roe is overturned this summer, would immediately prohibit abortion. Others are more likely to enact legislation swiftly. President Joe Biden cautioned that, if the decision remains unchanged, such a shift will have far-reaching consequences.
“It disturbs me much that, after 50 years, we are going to declare that a woman has no right to choose,” he remarked.
“The argument utilized, however, is considerably more deep. Every every choice involving the concept of privacy would be called into question as a result.”
Mr. Biden said that he wants legislation to entrench the current abortion access safeguards.
“If it becomes legislation, and what is written stays,” he continued, “it goes much beyond the question of whether or not there is a right to choose.”
“It touches on other fundamental rights, such as the freedom to marry and the right to decide on a variety of issues.”
Some rights are spelled out in the US Constitution, while others, such as abortion access, are just “unenumerated rights,” according to the court.
The same reasoning may be used in the event of homosexual marriage, in vitro fertilization, or some kinds of contraception, according to our reporter.
To stay up to date with our news, follow us on social networks: