Iowa court: Abortion not protected by state constitution

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By DAVID PITT

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday cleared the way for lawmakers to severely limit or ban abortion in the state, reversing a decision by the court just four years ago that guaranteed the right to abortion under the Iowa Constitution.

The court, now composed almost entirely of Republican appointees, concluded that a less conservative court wrongly decided abortion is among the fundamental privacy rights guaranteed by the Iowa Constitution and federal law.

Friday’s ruling comes amid expectations that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. If that happens, Iowa lawmakers could ban abortion without completing the lengthy process of amending the state constitution.

The Iowa decision stemmed from a lawsuit filed by abortion providers who challenged a 2020 law that required a 24-hour waiting period before a woman can get an abortion. A judge who struck down the law cited the state high court’s 2018 ruling. The judge also concluded that the law violated rules prohibiting passage of bills with more than one subject.



FILE - Marissa Messinger, of Lake View, Iowa, center, holds a sign during a rally to protest recent abortion bans, May 21, 2019, at the Statehouse in Des Moines, Iowa. The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday, June 17, 2022, cleared the way for lawmakers to severely limit or even ban abortion in the state, reversing a decision by the court just four years ago that guaranteed the right to the procedure under the Iowa Constitution. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, File)


Read more: https://apnews.com/article/abortion-health-iowa-supreme-court-government-and-politics-0074e14defa4a6699e65d921f0edbc58

[jimfields33]

1. Well that's not great

Should have added it when they had the chance.

[minstrel76]

2. I was born and live in Iowa. It's past time to try figure out how to move somewhere else.

[PSPS]

3. "now composed almost entirely of Republican appointees"

[in2herbs]

4. Earlier this week the USSC declared, in an opinion relative to an administrative ruling in

a veteran's case, that the mistaken interpretation of a statute by an administrative official was not cause for appeal/review and so the veteran's appeal was denied even though the error leading to the administrative ruling was recognized as being wrong by the USSC.

Is this veteran's opinion, after the USSCs abolishment of Roe, intended to lay the ground work for the USSC to deny an appeal brought by the Iowa health care provider if that appeal claims that the Iowa SC erred in its interpretation of the previous decision by the court that had guaranteed the right to abortion four years earlier?

And, is this veteran's decision intended to give the USSC the cover they want to deny all appeals related to Roe, etc., without discussion or consideration of the facts?

From the news article: "The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday cleared the way for lawmakers to severely limit or ban abortion in the state, reversing a decision by the court just four years ago that guaranteed the right to abortion under the Iowa Constitution."

[Marthe48]

5. Wish Constitutions weren't open to interpretation

Seems like if Democrats are in charge, there is a humane interpretation and when r's are in charge, draconian.

I'm out of reproductive age range, but I sure get tired of seeing women's abortion rights getting batted around like a tennis ball.