The Supreme Court refused to reinstate Iowa’s heartbeat law, which would have protected nearly all preborn children in the state from abortion. Although the legislation remains blocked, the justices said their decision was largely procedural, and that lawmakers could pass a new, samelaw instead.
In 2018, Gov. Kim Reynolds is a bill that would ban abortion after a heartbeat is detected, although it contains exceptions for rape and incest. But in 2019, the law is hit by Iowa Judge Michael Huppert, who claimed that “the due process and equal protection provisions of the Iowa Constitution” do not “serve the state’s compelling interest in promoting potential life.”
In 2019, the Iowa Supreme Court blocked that law, and Reynolds challenged that decision. Today, the court voted in a 3-3 decision on stand up the earlier decision. Writing for the justices who voted against reinstating the law, Justice Thomas Waterman said granting Reynolds’ request would mean bypassing the state legislature.
“In our view it is issuing legislation from the court to take a law that was dead when it was enacted and enacted for four years and then apply it,” he wrote.
Of course, preborn children, even in the first trimester, are living people and not just “potential life,” with brain waves, a four-chambered heart, and the ability to move her hands, feet, legs, and arms at six to seven weeks gestation.
Criticized by Gov. Reynolds the decision of the Supreme Court in a statement.
“To say the lack of action today by the Iowa Supreme Court is a disappointment is an understatement,” he said. “Not only does it ignore Iowa voters who elected representatives willing to stand up for the rights of preborn children, but it sided with a judge in one county who overruled Iowa law based on principles rejected of these. the US Supreme Court. There is no fundamental right to abortion and any law restricting it must be reviewed on a reasonable standard – a fact now acknowledged by three of the justices. However, without an affirmative decision, there is no justice for the unborn.”
Reynolds vowed to continue fighting for preborn children.
“There is no right more sacred than life, and none more deserving of our strongest defense than the innocent unborn,” he concluded. “We are evaluating our options in preparation for resuming the fight.”
