The Supreme Court Ducked Another Big Abortion Case. Clarence Thomas Is Livid.
For nearly three years, it has seemed inevitable that the Supreme Court would strike down the “buffer zones” that restrict protests near the entrances of reproductive health clinics. A majority of the court has already castigated these laws—and past precedent upholding them—as a subversion of anti-abortion protesters’ First Amendment rights.
The Republican-backed candidate for Wisconsin Supreme Court accused the court's liberal majority, all women, of being “driven ...
Justice Clarence Thomas was mad the court didn't take a case about local laws regulating protests at abortion clinics, but ...
Lawmakers in several states have introduced resolutions calling for the nation's highest court to overturn "Obergefell vs. Hodges." ...
Wyoming’s only full-service abortion clinic has stopped providing abortions, but it remains open after the state's governor ...
A discussion of how evolving federal and state law developments governing reproductive health care during the second Trump ...
Hours after Gov. Mark Gordon signed a new law regulating abortion clinics, with another heading to his desk, a pro-choice ...
In his decision, Judge Christian Jenkins cited the state’s constitutional amendment, approved by 57% of Ohio voters in ...
Kansas lawmakers have tried to change how Supreme Court justices are picked before. These debates are more than a decade old, ...
Results that may be inaccessible to you are currently showing.
Hide inaccessible results
Feedback