THAT’S A MAJOR CONCERN AND THE REASON WHY THEY WANT TO GET HIM OFF THE STREETS TONIGHT, BACK TO
YOU GOOD THAT THEY HAVE A LOT OF
HELP OUT THERE AS WELL. ALRIGHT,
SEAN. WELL, IF YOU’RE JUST
JOINING US, WE CONTINUE TO
FOLLOW BREAKING NEWS FROM
WASHINGTON AS THE SUPREME COURT
OVERTURNS ROE VERSUS WADE. LET’S
TAKE YOU THROUGH WHAT THIS MEANS
HERE IN MICHIGAN. TODAY’S
DECISION BY THE COURT NOW GIVES
STATE LEGISLATURES THE POWER TO
SETTLE ABORTION RIGHTS LAWS HERE
IN MICHIGAN IN 1931 LAW BANNING
ABORTION WOULD GO IN PLACE, BUT
THAT LAW HAS BEEN BLOCKED, AT
LEAST FOR NOW. SO AS IT STANDS,
ABORTION IS LEGAL HERE IN
MICHIGAN. WE WANT TO GET THIS
INSIGHT INTO NOT ONLY THE
COURT’S DECISION, BUT ALSO THE
WIDE REACHING IMPACT THAT IT
WILL HAVE AND FOR THAT WE WANT
TO BRING IN FORMER U. S ATTORNEY
AND CURRENT YOU HAVE M LOFT
PROFESSOR BARBARA MCQUADE. BARB,
THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.
GOOD TO SEE YOU. THANKS
KIMBERLY. GLAD TO BE WITH YOU.
ABSOLUTELY SO JASON JUST
MENTIONED THAT 1931 LAW BANNING
ABORTION THAT WOULD GO INTO
PLACE. BUT BACK IN APRIL, WE
KNOW GOVERNOR WHITMER FILED A
LAWSUIT AGAINST THAT BAND. IT’S
BLOCKED FOR NOW. CAN IT STAY
THAT WAY OR WHAT? WHAT COULD
HAPPEN WITH THAT? YES SO THE
JUDGE IN THAT CASE ENTERED
WHAT’S KNOWN AS A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION, AND THAT IS AN
INDICATION THAT SHE THINKS
THERE’S A SUBSTANTIAL LIKELIHOOD
OF SUCCESS ON THE MERITS OF
BLOCKING THAT PERMANENTLY. BUT
IT WAS JUST A PRELIMINARY
DECISION. IT WAS DONE QUICKLY
BECAUSE PEOPLE KNEW THAT THIS
DABS CASE WAS OUT THERE AND WAS
GOING TO BE DECIDED SOON, AND
THE PURPOSE OF THE LAWSUIT WAS
TO AVOID HAVING THE CASE THROWN
INTO JUST CHAOS. WHEN THAT
DECISION CAME DOWN LIKE TODAY,
SO THAT THERE COULD BE TIME TO
HAVE A THOUGHTFUL APPROACH TO
DECIDE WHETHER THAT CASE THAT
THAT 1931 LAW IS VALID OR NOT,
SO THAT CASE WILL PLAY OUT IN
THE COMING MONTHS. THE COURT
WILL MAKE A FINAL DECISION. I
IMAGINE IT WILL BE APPEALED TO
THE MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT, SO
IT COULD BE WELL INTO NEXT YEAR
TO 2023 BEFORE WE GET A FINAL
DECISION ON THAT, FOR NOW,
ABORTION REMAINS THE LAW IN
MICHIGAN. A LOT OF STATES NO
DOUBT WILL BE WATCHING MICHIGAN
TO SEE HOW WE HANDLE THIS
DECISION. AND WHAT HAPPENS COULD
HAVE A RIPPLE EFFECT NOT JUST IN
MICHIGAN BUT ACROSS THE COUNTRY
AND ON UPCOMING ELECTIONS. WHAT
ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT AND
WHAT HAPPENS FROM HERE? WELL I
THINK YOU’RE RIGHT, KIMBERLY
ABOUT ELECTIONS, AND I THINK
IT’S GONNA BE TRUE. IN MANY
STATES, YOU KNOW, THERE’S ABOUT
A DOZEN STATES THAT HAD TRIGGER
LAWS THAT HAVE GONE INTO EFFECT
IMMEDIATELY TODAY, MAKING
ABORTION ILLEGAL IN THEIR STATES
, ANOTHER 25 THAT HAD THESE OLD
LAWS ON THE BOOKS THAT ARE KIND
OF IN THIS LEGAL LIMBO RIGHT NOW
AND THEN OTHER STATES THAT ARE
DECIDING WHAT TO DO. THE SUPREME
COURT KIND OF GIVES THEM A BLANK
SLATE TO DECIDE. WHETHER THEY
WANT TO MAKE ABORTION
PERMISSIBLE AS IT IS PROTECTED
IN SOME STATES OR UP TO BAN IT,
AND I IMAGINE THIS IS GOING TO
BECOME A VERY HOT BUTTON ISSUE
FOR US HERE IN MICHIGAN IN
NOVEMBER. THERE IS A PETITION
THAT’S BEING CIRCULATED RIGHT
NOW FOR A BALLOT PROPOSAL TO
AMEND OUR MICHIGAN CONSTITUTION.
TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE RIGHT
TO AN ABORTION IS A PROTECTED
RIGHT UNDER OUR MICHIGAN
CONSTITUTION, SO THAT GETS ON
THE BALLOT. I THINK THAT COULD
REALLY BRING OUT A LOT OF VOTERS
ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT ISSUE THIS
FALL BACK TO THE 1931 LAW,
ATTORNEY GENERAL DANA NESSEL HAS
SAID SHE WILL NOT ENFORCE THAT
LAW. COUNTY PROSECUTORS. SOME
HAVE SAID THE SAME, BUT WHAT
ABOUT THE ONES THAT DON’T AGREE?
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR WOMEN’S
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS. YEAH, SO WE
COULD FIND OURSELVES IN A VERY
ODD SITUATION. UH ATTORNEY
GENERAL ISN’T ENFORCING IT. BUT
IN MICHIGAN, EACH COUNTY
PROSECUTORS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL
WHO HAS THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE
LAWS. THAT ARISE WITHIN HIS OR
HER JURISDICTION SO WE COULD
HAVE THE VERY CURIOUS SITUATION
THAT AND SAY WING COUNTY OR
OAKLAND COUNTY, WHERE THE
PROSECUTORS HAVE SAID THEY’RE
NOT GOING TO ENFORCE THE BAN,
PEOPLE CAN OBTAIN ABORTIONS. BUT
ANOTHER COUNTIES LIKE MACOMB
COUNTY, WHERE THE PROSECUTORS
SAID HE WILL ENFORCE THE BAN.
IT’S ILLEGAL, IT WOULD BE A VERY
CURIOUS SITUATION, AND I THINK
THAT HAVING THESE LAWS ON THE
BOOKS WILL CHILL DOCTORS AND
OTHER HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS FROM
PERFORMING ABORTIONS NO MATTER
WHERE THEY ARE, SO I THINK THAT
LEGAL UNCERTAINTY IS JUST NOT
GOOD FOR ANYBODY. AND SO I
THINK, HAVING PUT IT TO THE
VOTERS IN NOVEMBER FOR A
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT MIGHT
BE THE BEST WAY TO GET CLARITY
BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT PEOPLE
REALLY NEED TO BE ABLE TO
OPERATE IN THIS ENVIRONMENT.
SURE WE GOT ABOUT A MINUTE LEFT.
A LOT OF PEOPLE MAY BE
WONDERING, COULD OTHER DECISIONS
BE OVERTURNED? YOU KNOW ABOUT
THAT CONCURRING OPINION THAT
JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS CALLED
ON THE SUPREME COURT, AND HE
JUST PRETTY MUCH CAME OUT AND
SAID TO BUILD ON OVERTURNING ROE
VERSUS WADE BY REASSESSING
RIGHTS TO SAME SEX MARRIAGE AS
WELL AS CONTRACEPTION. WHAT ARE
YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? I THINK
ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE NOT FAIR
GAME, AND THAT’S BECAUSE THE
FOUNDATION ON WHICH THIS
ABORTION RIGHT RESTED IS THE
SAME FOUNDATION. FOR ALL OF
THOSE. IT’S CALLED THE
SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS RIGHT IN
1973, THE COURT READ INTO THE
CONSTITUTION. PRIVACY RIGHT AS
AN UN ENUMERATED RIGHT THAT
WASN’T ARTICULATED IN THE
CONSTITUTION BUT IS RESERVED TO
THE PEOPLE. IF THAT IDEA OF
SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS THOSE
AWAY THAT IS THE SAME BASIS FOR
THOSE CASES YOU JUST MENTIONED
LIKE CONTRACEPTION AND SAME SEX
, MARRIAGE AND INTERRACIAL
MARRIAGE. AND SO IT WON’T BE
TOMORROW BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO
HAVE A CASE OR CONTROVERSY COME
BEFORE THE COURT. BUT IF A STATE
WANTED TO BAN SAY, SEEMS TO SEX
MARRIAGE, UM AND THEN HAVE THAT
APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT. I THINK
THERE IS NOTHING TO PREVENT THE
COURT FROM DOING WHAT IT DID
TODAY AND REVERSING THE
OBERGEFELL DECISION TO BAN OR AT
LEAST REMOVE THE PROTECTIONS FOR
SAME SEX MARRIAGE. BARB MCWANE.
WE THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING