Abortion bill aims for Supreme Court
Iowa Republicans hope to roll back ‘Roe v. Wade’
DES MOINES – Iowa Republicans took a step toward passing the strictest abortion ban in the nation this week — one that is likely to end up in court if it becomes law.
But which court?
Iowa lawmakers passed the bill early Wednesday, advancing the legislation to Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds.
Republicans said they hope their law will face a legal challenge, so it can advance to the U.S. Supreme Court. Their goal is to overturn the 1973 landmark case Roe v. Wade, which established that women have a constitutional right to an abortion.
The Supreme Court has declined to hear similar cases in recent years, but as states pass legislation restricting abortions and President Trump appoints more conservative federal judges, such as Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, abortion opponents are increasingly optimistic.
“The science and technology have significantly advanced since 1973,” said the bill’s floor manager, GOP state Rep. Shannon Lundgren. “It is time for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue of life. It has taken decades for the science to catch up to what many have believed all along: that she’s a baby.”
The legislation would ban most abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected, at about six weeks into a pregnancy — often before many women even know they’re pregnant.
Groups that challenged other abortion restrictions in Iowa, such as Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, decried the bill as unconstitutional, foreshadowing an all-but-certain lawsuit.
Conservatives’ argument for passing a law now is that by the time it reaches the U.S. Supreme Court — which could take three or four years — Trump could have appointed another one or two justices who could overturn Roe.
The previous time the Supreme Court had a chance to hear a challenge to a heartbeat law, it declined to do so.
In 2016, the court rejected requests to hear challenges to a fetal heartbeat law in North Dakota and a 12-week abortion ban in Arkansas. The Supreme Court’s refusal left in place lower court rulings that blocked those laws.
“In a way, it’s just too easy a case,” said Paul Gowder, a constitutional law professor at the University of Iowa. “The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law.”
“In a way, it’s just too easy a case. The Supreme Court very rarely chooses to weigh in on cases that are easy with respect to its prior case law.”
Paul Gowder University of Iowa
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the North Dakota law in 2015. The federal appeals court sits one step below the Supreme Court and has jurisdiction over Iowa cases. Trump has appointed three judges to that court since its decision in the North Dakota case.
One scenario that could cause the Supreme Court to take up a heartbeat law would be a circuit split, in which two federal appellate courts disagreed about whether similar laws are unconstitutional. Chuck Hurley, chief counsel for the Family Leader, a faith-based group that opposes abortion, said he believes this will happen. “We don’t know when, I don’t know which panel, but Roe is a tattered mess from the day it was signed,” he said.
The fact that the 8th Circuit, a relatively conservative federal court, has refused to uphold a heartbeat law illustrates the challenges facing this approach.