The Sift Here’s what we’re Sifting today

Federal judge blocks Mississippi heartbeat law

by Lynde Langdon
Posted 5/24/19, 05:27 pm

A federal judge issued an order Friday temporarily blocking a Mississippi law that would protect unborn babies from abortion once they have a detectable heartbeat, usually at about six weeks of gestation. Opponents of the measure argued in court this week that the law would effectively stop abortion in Mississippi because many women don’t know they are pregnant until after they have passed the six-week threshold.

Last year, U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves, an appointee of President Barack Obama, struck down a similar law in Mississippi that would have protected babies from abortion after 15 weeks of gestation. In court Tuesday, Reeves said that the heartbeat law “smacks of defiance to this court,” The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Miss., reported.

Read more from The Sift Sign up for The Sift email
Lynde Langdon

Lynde is a WORLD Digital’s managing editor and reports on popular and fine arts. She lives in Wichita, Kan., with her husband and two daughters. Follow Lynde on Twitter @lmlangdon.

Read more from this writer


You must be a WORLD Member and logged in to the website to comment.
  • John Kloosterman
    Posted: Sun, 05/26/2019 03:35 pm

    Yeah, this was always going to happen.  Still an important statement, but this would probably have come down regardless of who appointed the judge--or it would be appealed higher.  You can't just bypass a decision like Roe vs. Wade on a technicality.  Wonder if the Alabama senators who passed it are hoping to get the decision up to the Supreme Court, or if they just passed it as a ploy to get people revved up for 2020.

  • OldMike
    Posted: Tue, 05/28/2019 01:08 pm

    Yes, we know these laws are going to be overturned. But I think it is important that people are being pushed to definitely come out for one side or the other: The sanctity of human life, or the idea that humans are disposable when it benefits others. 

    I can accept the taking of a human life in defense of others. I also believe it is appropriate for the state to take the life of someone who has committed certain particularly heinous crimes. 

    But not the taking of lives of those who have been given no opportunity whatsoever to find their potential, even to possibly become someone who greatly benefits their fellow man. 

  • Cosmo
    Posted: Tue, 05/28/2019 03:12 pm

    Roe vs Wade is technically unconstitutional from my perspective.  The Constitution was written to protect all the people of the USA.  The Fed's overstepped their authority too, in my view.  At best, or actually worst, it should be a states right.  We seem to confuse today what the Feds are really suppose to be doing.  They meddle in these kinds of things and then don't protect our boarders.   Abortion is murder..  God help us.