The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments around the State of Texas’ law that effectively bans nearly all abortions by allowing anyone, anywhere to sue anyone who performs an abortion for $10,000 or more. Justices appeared suspicious. During questioning by the Justices the Texas Solicitor General defended the law, SB8, by claiming those who are suing an abortion provider are suing because they have been “injured” by their own moral “outrage” to abortion.
The Economist’s Supreme Court reporter Steven Mazie describes the exchange between Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone and Justice Clarence Thomas:
“Stone just said that being really mad about someone getting an abortion (extreme moral or psychological harm) in Texas is enough of an ‘injury in fact’ to allow private citizens to sue abortion providers.”
Attorney, Boston Globe senior opinion writer, and former Supreme Court reporter Kimberly Atkins Stohr expresses shock over the argument:
Attorney and former FBI Special Agent Asha Rangappa:
Univ. of Texas Law law professor expresses her own outrage over the state’s defense of SB8:
It seems, at least to some, SB8 may not survive.
“Near the end of this first argument, it seems only Justices Alito and Gorsuch are fairly clearly on Texas’s side,” writes Mazie. “Really seems to me SB 8 will very soon be toast.”