Deadlocked Iowa Supreme Court means abortions legal for now

[cigaretteman]

Abortion will remain legal in Iowa until roughly 20 weeks of pregnancy — for now — after the Iowa Supreme Court split in an opinion delivered Friday morning.


The court considered Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds’ request that the courts reinstate a law blocked immediately in 2018 that would ban abortions once a fetus’ heartbeat can be detected.


In its opinion delivered Friday, three Iowa Supreme Court justices voted to let stand the district court ruling that said the so-called fetal heartbeat law remains unconstitutional. And three justices voted to reverse the district court ruling.


Advertisement

A seventh justice, Dana Oxley, recused herself from the case.


The split decision means the lower court’s ruling remains in effect. In 2019, a Polk County District Court Judge ruled the fetal heartbeat bill unconstitutional, saying it violates the due process and equal protection provisions of the Iowa Constitution.


That means abortion in Iowa remains legal until the 20th week of pregnancy.


Iowa statehouse Republicans, who have agenda-setting majorities, now must decide whether to write new abortion restrictions into law. The 2023 session of the Iowa Legislature concluded its regular work for the year in early May. They are not scheduled to return to the Iowa Capitol until January.


However, Republican leaders could call for a special session in order to enact abortion-related legislation, if they choose.


Justices Susan Christensen, Thomas Waterman and Edward Mansfield voted to uphold the district court’s ruling.

​

Justices Christopher McDonald, Matthew McDermott and David May voted to overturn the district court ruling.

Iowa Supreme Court’s split ruling means abortion remains legal in Iowa

A 3-3 decision by the Iowa Supreme Court on a so-called fetal heartbeat bill means abortion remains legal in Iowa, for now, until the 20th week of pregnancy. The ruling throws the issue back to state lawmakers.

www.thegazette.com

 

[lucas80]

Will Kimmie order an impeachment of one of the justices, or push to expand the court. Which would be quicker to get what she wants?

 

[lucas80]

I wonder why Oxley recused herself? I didn’t find anything directly on her recusal, and her history is in corporate law or teaching corporate law, minus the time she was a clerk.

 

[millah_22]

I wonder why Oxley recused herself? I didn’t find anything directly on her recusal, and her history is in corporate law or teaching corporate law, minus the time she was a clerk.

She once worked for a firm that represented a clinic that provided abortions.

Easist route for Reynolds would be to introduce a new bill that has similar language.

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

That is one helluva line from the de facto majority.

 

[mthawkeyes]

Will Kimmie order an impeachment of one of the justices, or push to expand the court. Which would be quicker to get what she wants?

This. I smell a campaign to impeach on the horizon.

 

[Chishawk1425]

Reynolds loses and we win.

 

[lucas80]

That is one helluva line from the de facto majority.

Dead justices walking.

 

[lucas80]

She once worked for a firm that represented a clinic that provided abortions.

Easist route for Reynolds would be to introduce a new bill that has similar language.

Weird. Kimmie must be pissed. She went to a lot of trouble to politicize the selection process, and a judge she appointed with the express hopes of ending abortion in Iowa showed some ethics and recused herself.

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

This saved Kimmy's skin and future political prospects IMO.

 

[DooBi]

Reynolds loses and we win.

What did you win?

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

What did you win?

Bodily autonomy for our citizens? A halt to the ever encroaching Republican Christo-fascism and Social Darwinism of the Iowa GOP?

 

[tumorboy]

What did you win?

The right to not have to pay for a bus or plane ticket for my side piece.

 

[DooBi]

Bodily autonomy for our citizens? A halt to the ever encroaching Republican Christo-fascism and Social Darwinism of the Iowa GOP?

Ummm.... I thought men weren't allowed to have an opinion on this.

 

[StormHawk42]

Said it birch's thread but the procedural matter alone should have made this an easy call. Surprised to see Waterman (who's generally pretty conservative) stick it in the eye with that quote above.

 

[Pinehawk]

This saved Kimmy's skin and future political prospects IMO.

She and the legislature will just revise and bring it back again next year, packaged slightly differently.

 

[globalhawk]

Ummm.... I thought men weren't allowed to have an opinion on this.

Wut?

 

[MitchLL]

Keep in mind, most/all of these Judges were appointed by Branstad and Reynolds.

Make no mistake, Dim Kim has to be fuming about this.

 

[Huey Grey]

6 weeks is an absolute joke. Gotta love how the Rs lied about fetal heartbeats to trick people into believing a 6 week old fetus in any way has a heart. All it has is a mass of cardiac cells completely unable to do real work.

 

[Chishawk1425]

 

[globalhawk]

View embedded media

The Republicans are their own worst enemy on this issue.

 

[DooBi]

View embedded media

Here here!

 

[joelbc1]

Bob Vander Plaats and his Family Leader folks are organizing the next vote to remove a few judges.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

Will Kimmie order an impeachment of one of the justices, or push to expand the court. Which would be quicker to get what she wants?

A special session.

 

[Huey Grey]

A special session.

The rest of the GOP in the nation will be kicking themselves when she does.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

The rest of the GOP in the nation will be kicking themselves when she does.

Why?

 

[joelbc1]

A special session.

She will have them removed by the voters. Keeps her “hands clean” and gives her a chance to tell us one more time how “Iowans just do the right thing.”
She will let Vander PLaats and his “Family Leader” folks do her dirty work for her (again)….all in the name of God.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

She will have them removed by the voters. Keeps her “hands clean” and gives her a chance to tell us one more time how “Iowans just do the right thing.”
She will let Vander PLaats and his “Family Leader” folks do her dirty work for her (again)….all in the name of God.

The way I understand this ruling is that it isn't against the actual concept of the law, but rather a procedural ruling. Am I wrong?

 

[Huey Grey]

Why?

Because abortion is toxic for the Rs. Last thing they need is some idiot like Reynolds stirring the pot up again.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

Because abortion is toxic for the Rs. Last thing they need is some idiot like Reynolds stirring the pot up again.

Fair point.

 

[Tom Paris]

Abortion will remain legal in Iowa until roughly 20 weeks of pregnancy — for now — after the Iowa Supreme Court split in an opinion delivered Friday morning.


The court considered Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds’ request that the courts reinstate a law blocked immediately in 2018 that would ban abortions once a fetus’ heartbeat can be detected.


In its opinion delivered Friday, three Iowa Supreme Court justices voted to let stand the district court ruling that said the so-called fetal heartbeat law remains unconstitutional. And three justices voted to reverse the district court ruling.


Advertisement

A seventh justice, Dana Oxley, recused herself from the case.


The split decision means the lower court’s ruling remains in effect. In 2019, a Polk County District Court Judge ruled the fetal heartbeat bill unconstitutional, saying it violates the due process and equal protection provisions of the Iowa Constitution.


That means abortion in Iowa remains legal until the 20th week of pregnancy.


Iowa statehouse Republicans, who have agenda-setting majorities, now must decide whether to write new abortion restrictions into law. The 2023 session of the Iowa Legislature concluded its regular work for the year in early May. They are not scheduled to return to the Iowa Capitol until January.


However, Republican leaders could call for a special session in order to enact abortion-related legislation, if they choose.


Justices Susan Christensen, Thomas Waterman and Edward Mansfield voted to uphold the district court’s ruling.

​

Justices Christopher McDonald, Matthew McDermott and David May voted to overturn the district court ruling.

Iowa Supreme Court’s split ruling means abortion remains legal in Iowa

A 3-3 decision by the Iowa Supreme Court on a so-called fetal heartbeat bill means abortion remains legal in Iowa, for now, until the 20th week of pregnancy. The ruling throws the issue back to state lawmakers.

www.thegazette.com

I hate Kim.

 

[joelbc1]

The way I understand this ruling is that it isn't against the actual concept of the law, but rather a procedural ruling. Am I wrong?

Which was EXACTLY what the justices were removed from office for following the “gay marriage” law in IOwa…..The SC voted to uphold the district court judge and his interpretaction of the law…they did not vote on the fact or whether the law was “legal” or not. BTW, the district court judge who made the ruling (Hansen, I believe) was “reaffirmed” with nearly 70% of the vote.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

Which was EXACTLY what the justices were removed from office for following the “gay marriage” law in IOwa…..The SC voted to uphold the district court judge and his interpretaction of the law…they did not vote on the fact or whether the law was “legal” or not. BTW, the district court judge who made the ruling (Hansen, I believe) was “reaffirmed” with nearly 70% of the vote.

The Hansen retention vote took place after the justices were voted out. By then the passion had waned.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

I hate Kim.

Tom,

Why are you so passionate about abortion?

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

The Hansen retention vote took place after the justices were voted out. By then the passion had waned.

Because Conservatives have underdeveloped cerebral cortexes, and can only react like lab rats to the stimuli of the moment.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

Because Conservatives have underdeveloped cerebral cortexes, and can only react like lab rats to the stimuli of the moment.

I'd say most Americans have short attention spans.

 

[Masterprime]

20 week old cluster of cells

 

[joelbc1]

The Hansen retention vote took place after the justices were voted out. By then the passion had waned.

Gee, I hate to disagree with you Northern, but RECORDS would indicate you are full of shit on this one. According to “Ballotpedia” Judge Hanson of the 3rd District Court (the judge who made the Varnum ruling in District CourtP) received 66% of the retention vote in 2010 (the same election the 3 SC justices were voted out of office by Iowans) and in 2016 he received 73% of the popular vote. Therefore I think I can conclude that Hanson won his retention in the same election the 3 SC justices (BAKER, STREIT AND TANUS) were voted out of office. Maybe the voters of the 3rd Judicial District of Iowa are a little smarter than the average Iowa voter and UNDERSTAND what they are voting for/against?
In short Norther, Hanson and the 3 Supreme Court justices were voted upon the same day…….got another reason?

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

Gee, I hate to disagree with you Northern, but RECORDS would indicate you are full of shit on this one. According to “Ballotpedia” Judge Hanson of the 3rd District Court (the judge who made the Varnum ruling in District CourtP) received 66% of the retention vote in 2010 (the same election the 3 SC justices were voted out of office by Iowans) and in 2016 he received 73% of the popular vote. Therefore I think I can conclude that Hanson won his retention in the same election the 3 SC justices (BAKER, STREIT AND TANUS) were voted out of office. Maybe the voters of the 3rd Judicial District of Iowa are a little smarter than the average Iowa voter and UNDERSTAND what they are voting for/against?
In short Norther, Hanson and the 3 Supreme Court justices were voted upon the same day…….got another reason?

You know what, I stand corrected. An effort was made to reject Hansen but that failed.

Likely the difference between a statewide vote vs one dominated by Polk County voters.

 

[joelbc1]

You know what, I stand corrected. An effort was made to reject Hansen but that failed.

Likely the difference between a statewide vote vs one dominated by Polk County voters.

Yep…..the county where about 1 of every 6 Iowans live…..and evidently most of the state’s brain power.