THE SUPREME COURT AND AYOTTE V. PLANNED PARENTHOOD

The day after the Supreme Court began hearing its first abortion case in five years the New York Times appears cautiously optimistic. From the article: “Well before the argument in a New Hampshire abortion case was over, the question that had drawn the crowds to the Supreme Court on a crisp Wednesday morning had an answer. No, abortion law was not about to undergo a major change in the hands of the new Roberts court, at least not yet.” Writing for National Review Online, Clarke Forsythe explains why Planned Parenthood is insisting for a “health” exception rather than a “medical emergency” exception: “Any potential emotional reservation a minor girl might have about a pregnancy (including pressure to have the abortion from her 22-year-old ‘boyfriend’) would be a ‘health’ reason for the abortion without parental notice. Since this unlimited ‘health exception’ would swallow the requirement of parental notice, the Supreme Court should reject the ‘health’ exception and uphold the New Hampshire medical emergency exception.” Dana Milbank in the Washington Post gives a detailed picture of the scene outside the Court. In other Court news the Los Angeles Times reports that Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito “argued forcefully” for the overturning of Roe v. Wade in a 1985 memo as assistant solicitor general in the Reagan administration.