SUBSCRIBE NOW Just 99¢ for your first month

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

U.S. SUPREME COURT

There were large gatherings in New York, Washington, Los Angeles and Chicago with some smaller counter-protests.
Keith Ellison said restrictions in surrounding states could lead people to Minnesota, if U.S. Supreme Court strikes down protections.
Legal experts said they are watching far-reaching proposals like those in Missouri that are aimed at preventing women from traveling out of the state to end a pregnancy or from obtaining abortion-inducing medication from a state where it is legal.
Lawyers and scholars backing abortion rights have criticized Alito's reading of history as glossing over disputed facts and ignoring relevant details as the conservative justice sought to demonstrate that a woman's constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy was wrongly recognized in the Roe ruling.

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines
The draft's legal reasoning, if adopted by the court when it issues its eventual ruling by the end of June, could threaten other rights that Americans take for granted in their personal lives.
Politico on Monday night released a leaked opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court that showed a majority of justices were preparing to overturn the landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade.
Such a ruling, which is expected to be issued in the next two months, would deliver a cataclysmic shock to the American body politic and potentially spark a political backlash, further civil unrest and a deeper reordering of the lives of millions.
Minnesota could become an island for abortion access in the Midwest if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade.
Abortion is one of the most divisive issues in U.S. politics and has been for nearly a half century. A 2021 poll by the Pew Research Center found that 59% of U.S. adults believed it should be legal in all or most cases.
Neal Katyal, a lawyer who regularly argues before the court, said if the report was accurate it would be 'the first major leak from the Supreme Court ever.'

ADVERTISEMENT

The House of Representatives is set to vote on legislation already passed by the Senate that would make it easier for the public to see if a member of the federal judiciary has a financial conflict of interest that would warrant being recused from hearing a case.
The policy prevented certain non-Mexican migrants, including asylum seekers fearing persecution in their home countries, from being released into the United States to await immigration proceedings, instead returning them to Mexico.
At issue is whether a public employee's prayers and Christian-infused speeches alongside players amounted to governmental speech or a private act separate from his official duties.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT