From 'bare minimum' to 'alarming': 7 reactions to Supreme Court's abortion pill ruling
Carrie Severino
Carrie Severino, president of the advocacy group Judicial Crisis Network and former clerk for Justice Clarence Thomas, tried to find the ruling's silver linings and shared her thoughts in an X thread.
Severino acknowledged that "the Supreme Court unanimously declined to find that the plaintiff doctors have Article III standing," expressing hope that "the liberal justices will adhere to this precedent in the future as historically they have been very willing to entertain much more tenuous standing theories for litigants whose positions they agreed with."
Severino highlighted how "the Court went out of its way to underscore the importance of conscience rights and say that existing federal law protects rather than coerces pro-life doctors." She contended that "this is meaningful given the record showed that the doctors had to complete abortions at least a dozen times," adding, "Hospitals can no longer hide behind specious legal arguments to strong-arm doctors, contrary to their consciences."
Get Our Latest News for FREE
"This case illustrates how the behemoth administrative state has empowered unelected bureaucrats to create regulations that affect the lives of everyday Americans but are so difficult — or even impossible — to successfully challenge in court," she stated. "This is why it's so important that our laws are passed by our elected representatives rather than put into place by fiat by agency bureaucrats."
Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: [email protected]
