When the Supreme Court says it wants a ‘live and let live’ approach, the media’s response is predictable
By Michael D. Shear September 13, 2018 10:53:03In the weeks since the Supreme Justices issued a landmark ruling in June that declared the Constitution’s prohibition on the federal government spending money on abortions unconstitutional, the coverage of the case has been mostly positive, although not without a hint of concern.
The court’s ruling has led to increased scrutiny of the role of abortion in American life, and that scrutiny has only intensified in recent weeks.
It was no accident that the justices’ decision on abortion triggered the most intense coverage, particularly in the news media.
The justices’ ruling has already been widely covered, and the coverage that followed it was often scathing and critical of the justices.
The New York Times editorial board wrote that the ruling “has the potential to undermine Roe v.
Wade and its guarantee of privacy for women’s health care decisions.”
The editorial board also expressed concern that the decision “will encourage a kind of abortionist-dominated society in which women’s choices are treated as something akin to criminal offenses.”
The Associated Press’s editorial board said the ruling’s impact will be “deeply troubling.”
The Washington Times said that the court “will make it clear that abortion is a crime and will outlaw abortion, a practice that many Americans would like to avoid and that has been the cornerstone of their society for generations.”
“In our time of crisis, the court’s decision to strike down Roe v Wade and reinstate the ‘partial-birth’ abortion ban could lead to a country where women will be arrested for having an abortion even if they are not pregnant,” the AP said.
The court’s latest ruling came in a case brought by three abortion clinics and the National Right to Life Committee, which sought to overturn the constitutionality of a provision in the Affordable Care Act that limits abortion coverage.
The AP said the justices “found the requirement that abortion providers meet certain standards be unconstitutional, and they said it was the ‘full-fledged’ and ‘final’ application of the constitutional guarantee of liberty.”
The court ruled that the law was unconstitutional because it “prohibits abortions in all circumstances, and places substantial burdens on abortion providers.”
In a separate case, the justices ruled that a federal judge’s ruling that a Texas law prohibiting abortion in the case of rape and incest is unconstitutional violates the First Amendment’s free-speech protections.
The AP called the Supreme court’s rulings “a rare moment of judicial restraint and a rare moment in American history when women and their doctors and patients are free to exercise their constitutional right to decide when to have an abortion, without fear of retribution or harassment.”
The New York Daily News said that “the abortion debate is about more than abortion.”
The newspaper said that abortion rights activists “need to get used to having their opponents on the court, particularly after the justices sided with the anti-abortion forces in the Supreme Courts ruling that the Affordable Health Care Act’s requirement that all abortion providers have admitting privileges at local hospitals violated women’s constitutional right of privacy.”
The Washington Post, which said the Supreme case “shows the court is out of step with the nation’s liberal and pro-abortion movement,” called the decision a “victory for the women’s movement.”
The AP wrote that abortion advocates are “ready to go on the offensive.”
The newspaper said, “The court, the most pro-life court in the country, now says that women have a right to terminate their pregnancies.
It said, ‘Women do not have a constitutional right in the United States to continue to be enslaved by an unwanted pregnancy.'”