The Epoch Times
The Epoch Times
AD
The Epoch Times
Support Us
SHARE
USCourts

Supreme Court Reverses 6th Circuit, Allows Kentucky Attorney General to Defend Abortion Law

Copy
Facebook
X
Truth
Gettr
LinkedIn
Telegram
Email
Save
Supreme Court Reverses 6th Circuit, Allows Kentucky Attorney General to Defend Abortion Law
The Supreme Court in Washington, on June 8, 2021. J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
Matthew Vadum
By Matthew Vadum
3/3/2022Updated: 3/4/2022

Kentucky’s Republican attorney general should be allowed to continue to defend a state abortion law struck down as unconstitutional by lower courts after the state’s Democratic governor refused to do so, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in an 8–1 decision on March 3.

Although Kentucky’s abortion law itself wasn’t at issue in the case, this is the court’s first opinion in an abortion-related case since Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s addition to the bench in October 2020 gave its conservative wing a 6–3 majority.

The high court examined only whether Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron should be allowed to intervene in the case on behalf of his state after the trial court invalidated the law, and its decision was upheld by an appeals court.

Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, had refused to defend the statute in court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit turned down Cameron’s request to take over state representation in the case.

The case revolves around Kentucky’s 2018 ban on dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortions on unborn children.

After the Supreme Court hearing, Cameron described the procedure as “gruesome,” adding that “it rips the baby apart.”

Then-Gov. Matt Bevin, a Republican, signed House Bill 454, the Human Rights of Unborn Children Act, which stopped such abortions after 11 weeks of pregnancy and was subsequently enjoined by federal courts.

Cameron welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling, calling it “a victory for the rule of law.”

“At every turn, we’ve maintained that Kentucky’s law banning live-dismemberment abortions is worth defending and should receive a full defense from the challenge brought by the ACLU and an abortion clinic,” Cameron said in a statement.

“Today, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed. This is a ruling that many in the commonwealth [of Kentucky] have hoped for, and we will proudly continue to carry the mantle for this important pro-life law by going back to the 6th Circuit and litigating the case.

“The court found that our office is the fail-safe for defending the commonwealth’s laws when they come under attack.”

Oral arguments in the case Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center were heard Oct. 12, 2021. The respondent, EMW Women’s Surgical Center, in Louisville, is Kentucky’s only licensed abortion clinic.

The court’s opinion (pdf) was written by Justice Samuel Alito.

In the document, Alito noted that “The importance of ensuring that States have a fair opportunity to defend their laws in federal court has been recognized by Congress.”

He wrote that the 6th Circuit panel erred by failing “to account for the strength of the Kentucky attorney general’s interest in taking up the defense of HB 454” when other state officials chose not to continue defending the statute.

“Paramount among the states’ retained sovereign powers is the power to enact and enforce any laws that do not conflict with federal law,” Alito wrote, adding that a state has a legitimate interest in perpetuating the enforceability of its own statutes.

“This means that a state’s opportunity to defend its laws in federal court should not be lightly cut off.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion, arguing that the majority’s holding in this case would promote uncertainty.

The Supreme Court has bent “over backward to accommodate the attorney general’s reentry into the case,” Sotomayor wrote.

“I fear today’s decision will open the floodgates for government officials to evade the consequences of litigation decisions made by their predecessors of different political parties, undermining finality and upsetting the settled expectations of courts, litigants, and the public alike.”

Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, ACLU senior staff attorney and lead counsel for the Kentucky abortion clinic, told Axios the ruling was disappointing.

“Politicians in Kentucky are working overtime to force people to continue pregnancies against their will, instead of doing what is best for the people they are supposed to serve,” she said.

“And it is not just in Kentucky.

“In Texas, most people are already being blocked from getting an abortion—a nightmare that could soon become reality for nearly half of this country, as the Supreme Court seems poised to gut or overturn Roe v. Wade.”

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has yet to decide two separate cases that directly challenge abortion laws in Texas and Mississippi.

Oral arguments took place in the two cases on Nov. 1 and Dec. 1, 2021, respectively.

The Texas case, which has garnered intense media coverage, has led to boycotts and demands for the repeal of the state’s unique fetal-heartbeat abortion law that relies on citizen participation for enforcement.

The high court voted 5–4 on Sept. 1, 2021, to deny a request to halt its enforcement, prompting President Joe Biden to claim the court was engaged in “an unprecedented assault on a woman’s constitutional rights,” as The Epoch Times reported.

A chain of abortion clinics argues the Texas statute violates Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), in which the Supreme Court discovered a constitutionally protected right to obtain an abortion before the fetus is viable, at around the 24-week mark.

The chain is also challenging the novel enforcement mechanism that relies on individuals filing lawsuits.

The Epoch Times also previously reported on oral arguments in the Mississippi case.

Mississippi’s only licensed abortion clinic is challenging the state’s Gestational Age Act, which allows abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation only for medical emergencies or severe fetal abnormality.

Citing Roe v. Wade, lower courts held the statute was unconstitutional.

Matthew Vadum
Matthew Vadum
contributor
Matthew Vadum is an award-winning investigative journalist.
Author’s Selected Articles

Supreme Court Temporarily Shields DOGE From Freedom of Information Requests

May 23, 2025
Supreme Court Temporarily Shields DOGE From Freedom of Information Requests

Supreme Court Allows Trump Admin to Remove Labor Board Members for Now

May 22, 2025
Supreme Court Allows Trump Admin to Remove Labor Board Members for Now

Supreme Court Deadlocks, Leaves in Place Block on Nation’s First Religious Charter School

May 22, 2025
Supreme Court Deadlocks, Leaves in Place Block on Nation’s First Religious Charter School

Supreme Court Won’t Hear Fireworks Company’s Dispute With Consumer Product Regulator

May 22, 2025
Supreme Court Won’t Hear Fireworks Company’s Dispute With Consumer Product Regulator
Related Topics
Kentucky
supreme court
abortion
Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron
Save
The Epoch Times
Copyright © 2000 - 2025 The Epoch Times Association Inc. All Rights Reserved.