1. Sotomayor Gets Political, By The Wall Street Journal, December 2, 2021, Pg. A18, Editorial The Supreme Court held a fascinating discussion on rights in the Constitution and when to overturn its own precedents on Wednesday in the oral argument on Mississippi’s ban on abortion after 15 weeks ( Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization). The media consensus is that a majority is prepared to alter its standard of review for abortion regulation by the states, though you never know for sure based on questions in oral arguments. One judgment we can safely make is that Justice Sonia Sotomayor is mad as hell about it, and she was willing to violate the Court’s normal standards of decorum to make her point. From the start she ripped into the lawyer for Mississippi, but more notable were her words that were intended as a message to her fellow Justices if they overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. … It’s no surprise that Justice Sotomayor feels strongly about abortion rights. But with those words she wasn’t addressing the legal questions at issue. She was asserting that if the Court revisits its abortion precedents its motivation would be political. She is throwing the legitimacy of her own institution into question. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sonia-sotomayor-gets-political-supreme-court-dobbs-v-jackson-abortion-roe-casey-11638400452?___________________________________________________________ 2. Justices Question Abortion Rights Precedent, Supreme Court case over Mississippi law challenges protections dating to Roe v. Wade, By Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall, The Wall Street Journal, December 2, 2021, Pg. A1 The Supreme Court’s conservative majority sharply questioned the propriety of constitutional protections for abortion rights dating back almost five decades as the justices heard arguments over the most significant abortion case in a generation. … By the end of the session, the preponderance of questions from conservative justices displayed a focus not on whether Mississippi could impose new limits on abortion rights, but rather whether the Supreme Court should issue a more sweeping ruling that removes constitutional protections for abortion altogether https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-hears-arguments-in-landmark-mississippi-abortion-case-11638354602?___________________________________________________________ 3. Pro-lifers tout years of major advances in medical technology, By Valerie Richardson, The Washington Times, December 2, 2021, Pg. A1 Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said during Wednesday’s oral arguments in a case challenging Mississippi’s abortion law that “not much has changed” since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, but pro-life advocates disagreed, citing the science. When Roe was decided, fetal viability began at about 28 weeks of gestation. Thanks to medical advances, the fetus is now considered viable at 23 or 24 weeks, and sometimes earlier. A baby girl born in Texas in 2014 at 21 weeks of gestation, weighing just 14.5 ounces, is reportedly thriving. … “As a practicing diagnostic radiologist, I can attest that advances in ultrasound technology continue to astonish the medical community as to the humanity of the unborn child, a truth and medical reality that we can now see clearly in the earliest weeks of life,” said Dr. Grazie Pozo Christie, a senior fellow for The Catholic Association. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/1/pro-life-advocates-urge-liberal-justices-follow-sc/___________________________________________________________ 4. The Case Against Abortion, By Ross Douthat, The New York Times, December 2, 2021, Pg. A27, Opinion In the name of privacy and civil liberties we impose limits on how the justice system polices and imprisons, and we may celebrate activists who try to curb that system’s manifest abuses. But we don’t (with, yes, some anarchist exceptions) believe that we should remove all legal protections for people’s property or lives. That removal of protection would be unjust no matter what its consequences, but in reality we know that those consequences would include more crime, more violence and more death. And the anti-abortion side can give the same answer when it’s asked why we can’t be content with doing all the other things that may reduce abortion rates and leaving legal protection out of it: Because while legal restrictions aren’t sufficient to end abortion, there really are a lot of unborn human lives they might protect. Consider that when the State of Texas put into effect this year a ban on most abortions after about six weeks, the state’s abortions immediately fell by half. I think the Texas law, which tries to evade the requirements of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey by using private lawsuits for enforcement, is vulnerable to obvious critiques and liable to be abused. It’s not a model I would ever cite for pro-life legislation. But that immediate effect, that sharp drop in abortions, is why the pro-life movement makes legal protection its paramount goal. According to researchers at the University of Texas at Austin, who surveyed the facilities that provide about 93 percent of all abortions in the state, there were 2,149 fewer legal abortions in Texas in the month the law went into effect than in the same month in 2020. About half that number may end up still taking place, some estimates suggest, many of them in other states. But that still means that in a matter of months, more than a thousand human beings will exist as legal persons, rights-bearing Texans — despite still being helpless, unreasoning and utterly dependent — who would not have existed had this law not given them protection. But, in fact, they exist already. They existed, at our mercy, all along. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/30/opinion/abortion-dobbs-supreme-court.html___________________________________________________________ 5. Gathered outside court, pro-lifers feel hopeful about outcome of Dobbs, By Kurt Jensen, Catholic News Service, December 2, 2021 The pro-life rally on the sidewalk outside the U.S. Supreme Court Dec. 1 found much to cheer about as the nine justices inside heard arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. … “Today the court did a great job articulating its constitutional role: not to pick winners and losers on divisive issues like abortion, but to remain ‘scrupulously neutral,’ as Justice (Brett) Kavanaugh said,” Carrie Severino, president of Judicial Crisis Network, said in a Twitter thread. “The way it works out will look different in different states, but the court should let the people decide.” Grazie Pozo Christie, a radiologist and a senior fellow with The Catholic Association, took issue with some comments made during the oral arguments by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor about the viability of a fetus. Also, Sotomayor said only “fringe” doctors believe in the existence of fetal pain as a reason to restrict abortion. “Contrary to the arguments of Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, incredible advances in science and fetal medicine have rendered viability a totally incoherent legal standard,” Christie. “Justice Sotomayor’s assertions … were wholly ignorant of the tremendous scientific advances in fetal medicine,” Christie said in her statement. “As recently as last year, doctors in the Journal of Medical Ethics wrote, ‘Current neuroscientific evidence supports the possibility of fetal pain before the ‘consensus’ cutoff of 24 weeks’ and may be as early as 12 weeks.” As for the viability issue, “contrary to the arguments of Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, incredible advances in science and fetal medicine have rendered viability a totally incoherent legal standard,” she said. “Just last week, the world heard news that a baby born at 21 weeks and survived set a new record for premature survival.” https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2021/12/gathered-outside-court-pro-lifers-feel-hopeful-about-outcome-of-dobbs___________________________________________________________ 6. Archbishop urges prayers for Supreme Court as it hears abortion law case, By Julie Asher, Catholic News Service, December 2, 2021 The chairman of the U.S. bishops’ pro-life committee Dec. 1 urged Catholics, people of other faiths and all people of goodwill to unite in prayer that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade in its eventual ruling on Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. … “In the United States, abortion takes the lives of over 600,000 babies every year,” said Baltimore Archbishop William E. Lori, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities. “Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health could change that.” “We pray that the court will do the right thing and allow states to once again limit or prohibit abortion, and in doing so protect millions of unborn children and their mothers from this painful, life-destroying act,” he added. “We invite all people of goodwill to uphold the dignity of human life by joining us in prayer and fasting for this important case.” … At the rally outside the court, Grazie Pozo Christie, a radiologist and a senior fellow with The Catholic Association, similarly commented that “incredible advances in science and fetal medicine have rendered viability a totally incoherent legal standard.” “Science and common sense tell us children in the womb are as undeniably human as the rest of us,” remarked Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote, an independent political advocacy group. “We know for instance that by 15 weeks they already have beating hearts, can suck their thumbs, and even feel pain.” “It is time to overturn Roe and allow Americans to once again pass laws that reflect these basic values,” he said in a statement. He added that “millions of faithful Catholics across the nation are hopeful after today’s oral arguments that the Supreme Court of the United States will restore sanity to its abortion jurisprudence which has enabled over 62 million American children to be aborted since 1973 when Roe v. Wade was decided.” “Protecting innocent life is the preeminent moral issue for Catholics but it is also the condition of any just society, and abortion robs our most vulnerable citizens of that most basic human right,” Burch said. https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2021/12/archbishop-urges-prayers-for-supreme-court-as-it-hears-abortion-law-case___________________________________________________________ 7. Pro-life leaders, legal experts speak out after Dobbs arguments at US Supreme Court, By Autumn Jones, Catholic News Agency, December 1, 2021, 5:01 PM Dr. Grazie Pozo ChristieSenior Fellow, The Catholic Association “Justice Sotomayor’s assertions in today’s oral argument in the landmark abortion case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health about fetal pain were wholly ignorant of the tremendous scientific advances in fetal medicine. As recently as last year, doctors in the Journal of Medical Ethics wrote, ‘Current neuroscientific evidence supports the possibility of fetal pain before the ‘consensus’ cutoff of 24 weeks’ and may be as early as 12 weeks. Not only does medicine agree that fetal anesthesia be administered for fetal surgery, a clear reflection of the medical consensus that unborn babies can feel pain, but like viability, the line marking when they feel pain continues to inch earlier.” “As a practicing diagnostic radiologist, I can attest that advances in ultrasound technology continue to astonish the medical community as to the humanity of the unborn child, a truth and medical reality that we can now see clearly in the earliest weeks of life. To compare an unborn child to a brain-dead person or a corpse flouts science which tells us that at 15 weeks gestation, a baby’s organs are fully formed, her heart pumps 26 quarts of blood a day, and her lungs are already practicing drawing breath. This case is before the Supreme Court today in large part because Americans have seen the evolving science and increasingly want a voice in a question of great moral consequence.” https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/249755/pro-life-leaders-legal-experts-speak-out-after-dobbs-arguments-at-us-supreme-court___________________________________________________________ 8. Pope heads to Cyprus and Greece, raising hopes he will change conversation on refugees, By Claire Giangravé, Religion News Service, December 1, 2021, 4:54 PM Immigrants and refugees are expected to be the focus of Pope Francis’ imminent apostolic visit to Cyprus and Greece, and some asylum-seekers harbor the hope to be selected by the pope to return with him to the Vatican. The trip, Francis’ 35 since becoming pope, will take him to two countries that bear the brunt of Europe’s frontiers, where large influxes of migrants and asylum-seekers have put huge strains on local populations. He departs the Vatican on Thursday (Dec. 2) and will return Monday. Catholics represent a minority in the mainly Orthodox Christian countries of Cyprus and Greece, making ecumenism another important theme of the papal visit. But Catholic aid organizations are hoping the pontiff will fill some of the leadership gap on refugees left by  German Chancellor Angela Merkel, a champion of resettlement who is retiring from politics. https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/pope-heads-to-cyprus-and-greece-raising-hopes-he-will-change-conversation-on-refugees/2021/12/01/3a246474-52f1-11ec-83d2-d9dab0e23b7e_story.html___________________________________________________________ 9. Paris archbishop who had ‘ambiguous’ relationship resigns, By Associated Press, December 1, 2021, 7:57 AM Pope Francis has accepted the resignation of the archbishop of Paris after he admitted to an “ambiguous” relationship with a woman in 2012. Paris Archbishop Michel Aupetit said in a statement Thursday that he offered to step down “to preserve the diocese from the division that suspicion and loss of trust are continuing to provoke.” The Vatican said in a statement that the pope accepted Aupetit’s offer, and named Monsignor Georges Pontier to serve in the archbishop’s place. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/paris-archbishop-who-had-ambiguous-relationship-resigns/2021/12/02/d4340160-5363-11ec-83d2-d9dab0e23b7e_story.html___________________________________________________________ 10. Physician blasts Justice Sonia Sotomayor for ‘dead brain people’ comment about fetal pain, By Alejandro Bermudez, Catholic News Agency, December 1, 2021, 4:22 PM U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor drew criticism from an accomplished physician for comments that appeared to draw a comparison between an unborn child and a corpse, suggesting that fetal movements recoiling from pain can be likened to reflexes in dead bodies. The comments came as Sotomayor attempted to create question marks within the larger argument for the humanity of unborn babies during the oral arguments Dec. 1 in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a potentially landmark abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade. “To compare an unborn child to a brain-dead person or a corpse flouts science which tells us that at 15 weeks gestation, a baby’s organs are fully formed, her heart pumps 26 quarts of blood a day, and her lungs are already practicing drawing breath,” said Dr. Grazie Pozo Christie, M.D., a radiology specialist with more than 20 years of experience. Sotomayor’s comments came on the heels of Mississippi Solicitor General Scott G. Stewart’s argument that advances in medical science over the past 30 years have helped Americans grow in “knowledge and concern” about whether the unborn child is “fully human,” which are based in part on increased knowledge of the pain experienced by fetuses in the womb. “Virtually every state defines a brain death as death. Yet, the literature is filled with episodes of people who are completely and utterly brain dead responding to stimuli,” Sotomayor said. “There’s about 40% of dead people who, if you touch their feet, the foot will recoil. There are spontaneous acts by dead brain people. So I don’t think that a response to — by a fetus necessarily proves that there’s a sensation of pain or that there’s consciousness,” the justice said. Christie, co-author of a science-based amicus brief presented to the Supreme Court in the Dobbs case, criticized the Supreme Court justice for her assertions, calling them “wholly ignorant of the tremendous scientific advances in fetal medicine.” “As recently as last year, doctors in the Journal of Medical Ethics wrote, ‘Current neuroscientific evidence supports the possibility of fetal pain before the ‘consensus’ cutoff of 24 weeks’ and may be as early as 12 weeks,” Christie said. “Not only does medicine agree that fetal anesthesia be administered for fetal surgery, a clear reflection of the medical consensus that unborn babies can feel pain, but like viability, the line marking when they feel pain continues to inch earlier,” Christie added. Christie emphasized that the medical awareness of the humanity of the unborn child has made its way to ordinary citizens, and not just doctors. “This case is before the Supreme Court today in large part because Americans have seen the evolving science and increasingly want a voice in a question of great moral consequence,” she said. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/249754/physician-blasts-sotomayor-for-dead-brain-people-comment-about-fetal-pain___________________________________________________________

TCA Media Monitoring provides a snapshot from national newspapers and major Catholic press outlets of coverage regarding significant Catholic Church news and current issues with which the Catholic Church is traditionally or prominently engaged. The opinions and views expressed in the articles do not necessarily reflect the views of The Catholic Association.
Subscribe to the TCA podcast!
“Conversations with Consequences” is a new audio program from The Catholic Association. We’ll bring you thoughtful dialogue with the leading thinkers of our time on the most consequential issues of our day. Subscribe today or listen online and enjoy our entertaining and informative weekly episodes.