
Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority strikes down 176-year-old abortion ban
The ruling came as no surprise given that liberal justices control the high court. One of them went so far as promising to uphold abortion rights during her campaign two years ago, and they blasted the ban during
oral arguments
in November.
The statute Wisconsin legislators adopted in 1849, widely interpreted as a near-total ban on abortions, made it a felony for anyone other than the mother or a doctor in a medical emergency to destroy 'an unborn child.'
The ban was in effect until 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion nationwide nullified it. Legislators never officially repealed it, however, and conservatives argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn Roe reactivated it.
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit that year arguing that abortion restrictions legislators enacted during the nearly half-century that Roe was in effect trumped the ban. Kaul specifically cited a 1985 law that essentially permits abortions until viability. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation.
Republican legislators also enacted laws under Roe requiring a woman to undergo an ultrasound, wait 24 hours before having the procedure and provide written consent, and mandating that doctors physically provide abortion-inducing drugs to women in their presence.
The majority ruling concluded that 'the legislature impliedly repealed' the ban 'by enacting comprehensive legislation about virtually every aspect of abortion including where, when, and how healthcare providers may lawfully perform abortions.'
'That comprehensive legislation so thoroughly covers the entire subject of abortion that it was clearly meant as a substitute for the 19th century near-total ban on abortion,' Justice Rebeca Dallet wrote.
Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, defended the 1849 ban in court, arguing that it could coexist with the newer abortion restrictions, just as different penalties for the same crime coexist.
Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled in 2023 that the 1849 ban outlaws feticide — which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother's consent — but not consensual abortions. Abortions have been available in the state since that ruling but the state Supreme Court decision gives providers and patients more certainty that abortions will remain legal in Wisconsin.
Urmanski had asked the state Supreme Court to overturn Schlipper's ruling without waiting for a decision from a lower appellate court.
The liberal justices all but telegraphed how they would rule. Justice Janet Protasiewicz had openly stated on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights. During oral arguments, Dallet declared that the ban was authored by white men who held all the power in the 19th century, while Justice Jill Karofsky likened the ban to a 'death warrant' for women and children who need medical care.
A solid majority of Wisconsin voters in the 2024 election, 62%, said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, according to AP VoteCast. About one-third said abortion should be illegal in most cases and only 5% said it should be illegal in all cases.
In a dissent, Justice Annette Ziegler called the ruling 'a jaw-dropping exercise of judicial will.' She said the liberal justices caved in to their personal preferences and their Democratic constituencies, and accused Protasiewicz of promising to deliver Wednesday's decision during her campaign.
'Put bluntly, our court has no business usurping the role of the legislature, inventing legal theories on the fly in order to make four justices' personal preference the law,' Ziegler said.
Urmanski's attorney, Andrew Phillips, didn't immediately respond to an email Wednesday morning seeking comment. Kaul's spokesperson, Riley Vetterkind, also didn't immediately return an email.
Heather Weininger, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life, called the ruling 'deeply disappointing.' She said in a statement that the liberals failed to point to any statute that explicitly repealed the 1849 ban.
'To assert that a repeal is implied is to legislate from the bench,' she said.
Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin asked the Supreme Court in February to decide whether the 1849 ban was constitutional. The court dismissed that case with no explanation, drawing more criticism from Ziegler and conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley.
Democratic-backed Susan Crawford defeated conservative Brad Schimel for an open seat on the court in April, ensuring liberals will maintain their 4-3 edge until at least 2028. Crawford has not been sworn in yet and was not part of Wednesday's ruling.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Rep. Mark Green resigns from Congress, leaving Speaker Johnson with an even narrower Republican majority in the House
Rep. Mark Green, R-Tenn., announced his official resignation from Congress on Friday, a move that was expected but one that could, at least for now, shrink Republicans' already narrow majority in the House. "To my constituents across Tennessee's 7th District—thank you. The trust you put in me is humbling. I will look back fondly on my years of serving as your voice in Washington," Green wrote in a post on X. With his resignation, Republicans are down to a 219-212 majority in the House, at least until his seat in the solidly red district is filled. His resignation will be effective July 20, Fox News reports from a letter Green sent to House Republican leadership. Green's resignation is a blow to House Speaker Mike Johnson's already narrow majority in the lower chamber, a fact that was on stark display this week as he was trying to pass President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill." Johnson struggled to coalesce his conference around the megabill, and the narrow majority gave him little wiggle room for defections. With Green's resignation, Johnson's could face an even more challenging road ahead. Green, who chairs the Homeland Security Committee, said he was returning to the private sector to start his own business, but did not provide details about the business. "While I cannot give the details here, I will be doing something specifically designed to help America compete against the CCP [Chinese Communist Party], but this time in business," Green said in a video on X. Green was elected to serve in Congress in 2018, succeeding Sen. Marsha Blackburn. While his retirement has been expected — he said in June that he was stepping away from his role — it comes after Congress has experienced turnover among lawmakers in recent months, such as Rep. Mike Waltz, R-Fla., who left his post to serve in the Trump administration, before he stepped down from that role. Another Republican, Rep. Don Bacon, a centrist, also recently announced his retirement from Congress. Bacon's retirement creates an opportunity for Democrats to win the House seat representing Bacon's Omaha, Nebraska, district.


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Elon Musk says he has formed a new U.S. political party, the 'America Party'
Elon Musk said Saturday that he has formed a new political party, the "America Party," which he claims will give Americans "back your freedom." "By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!" Musk wrote on X, one day after he posted a poll on the platform asking his followers if they support creating the "America Party." Musk, the world's richest man, suggested Friday that the new party could focus "on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts." "Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people," Musk said Friday. Musk did not say where the party may be registered. It did not appear to be registered with the Federal Election Committee. He also said that the party would caucus independently and that "legislative discussions would be had with both parties," according to a reply to a user on X. Musk was the largest donor during the 2024 presidential campaign, giving more than $280 million throughout the cycle, predominantly to presidential candidate Donald Trump, although he also supported other Republican candidates. If Musk chooses to get involved in any competitive congressional races in 2026, it could make a significant difference in a close contest. The Tesla CEO's post comes after a public feud with Trump erupted. It was a dramatic turnaround for the two men, who had been close allies during the early days of the second Trump administration. But their relationship deteriorated as the two men exchanged barbs on social media, mainly due to Musk's vocal opposition to Trump's "big, beautiful bill," CNBC has reported. Musk had previously spearheaded Trump's efforts to slash the federal government through the controversial "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE), but stepped back from his role in May after his involvement with the program began to negatively impact his business. Since feuding with Trump, Musk has publicly floated the idea of a new political party, particularly amid his continued strong opposition to Trump's sweeping domestic policy package, which passed last week. "It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!" Musk said Monday. "Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people," he said.

Politico
2 hours ago
- Politico
Musk announces arrival of new ‘America Party' after Trump split
'By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it! When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' he wrote. 'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.' Musk's third-party musings began in earnest after last month's massive meltdown between the president and his former adviser over the 'big beautiful bill,' which the former DOGE head has decried as wasteful. As Trump on Thursday flaunted his successful push to muscle the Republican megabill through Congress this week, Musk sought to drum up support for his potential third party launch, positing that his new party would target a handful of vulnerable swing seats to leverage political power. 'Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people,' he wrote. While Musk may have the millions to pour into backing certain candidates — which he has already promised to do, pledging to support Rep. Thomas Massie's (R-Ky.) reelection campaign amid targeting from Trump — establishing a third party involves a series of thorny obstacles including navigating complex state laws, ballot access regulations and other legal hoops. So far, the billionaire would-be party founder has yet to outline a concrete plan forward. Just two months ago, Musk had vowed to cut back on political spending, saying he had 'done enough.'