3 States Ask Supreme Court to Void Abortion Shield Laws
Is this necessary to stop blue states from nullifying red-state abortion laws or will it lead to a nationwide abortion ban?
Story
Above: Demonstrators at an abortion rights rally outside of the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. on March 4, 2020. Image credit: Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images
The Facts
- Attorneys general from Louisiana, Alabama and Arkansas filed suit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on Wednesday, arguing that abortion shield laws in New York, Massachusetts and California are unconstitutional.
- The complaint asks SCOTUS to find the shield laws violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause, the equal sovereignty doctrine, the Dormant Commerce Clause and the federal common law of public nuisance, and seeks an injunction blocking enforcement.
- Abortion shield laws are state laws, enacted mostly by Democratic-led states, that protect abortion providers and patients from lawsuits, prosecution and extradition by states with abortion bans.
Sources Split
LEFT
CENTER
RIGHT
+1
+1
+3
+1
ESTAB
CRIT
CENTER
PRO
ESTAB
The Spin
Republican narrative
After SCOTUS' Dobbs decision, states earned the right to set their own abortion policy. Blue states mailing pills past those borders are nullifying laws passed by voters in red states. Equal sovereignty means no state gets to write the rules for every other one.
Democratic narrative
Shield laws exist to make sure states can set their own abortion policies. Gutting them would let a handful of banned states export their policies nationwide. The real target here was never to assure states' rights, but to find a way to implement a nationwide ban.
