The Supreme Court today reinstated an Indiana law that requires the burial or cremation of fetal remains after an abortion. At the same time, it chose not to revive a part of the same law that banned abortions intended to select the sex or race of a child.
Between the lines: The court offered explicit reassurances that its rulings today did not touch the fundamental principles of Roe v. Wade — but the justices' ideological divisions were nevertheless on full display.
Details: The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down both parts of Indiana's anti-abortion law, and the appeal to the Supreme Court was seen as a potential referendum on Roe v. Wade.
- But the court wrote that its fetal-remains ruling "does not implicate" broader questions about women's right to an abortion.
- And it said it would simply stay out of any debate over sex- and race-selective abortions because only one federal appeals court has dealt with the issue.
- Those decisions were issued "per curiam," or for the court — a tool the justices employ when they wish to speak with one voice, rather than in a traditional decision written by an individual justice.
Yes, but: Even as the court tried to speak with one voice, it engendered plenty of dissent.
- Two liberals — Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor — said the court shouldn't have gotten involved in the fetal-remains question.
- And conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote his own opinion about sex- and race-selective abortion, calling it "a tool of modern-day eugenics" and reiterating his opposition to abortion generally.
The bottom line: The court avoided core abortion questions today, but, as Thomas wrote, "cannot avoid them forever."
Go deeper: Where abortion restrictions stand: The states that have passed laws
