« …The fetus has an interest in having a life and that doesn’t change, does it, from the point before viability to the point after …
« … The fetus has an interest in having a life and that doesn’t change, does it, from the point before viability to the point after viability?” In a round of questioning with Julie Rikelman, the senior director of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Justice Samuel Alito raised questions about the topic of viability. As reported by The New York Times: Justice Alito is asking a series of questions about why viability should be the line. He notes a woman who doesn’t want to have a baby has that same interest before and after viability. From the perspective of fetal life, he notes, viability is dependent on technology and medical practices, which changes over time. Justice Alito asked Rikelman, “I’m sure you know the arguments about the viability line as well as I do, probably better than I do. What would you say in defense of that line? “What would you say to the argument that has been made many times by people who are pro-choice and pro-life that the line really doesn’t make any sense…?” He added, “If a woman wants to be free of the burdens of pregnancy, that interest does not disappear the moment the viability line is crossed, isn’t that right?” Rikelman responded no but said the state views viability as arbitrary because it discounts the woman’s interests. Alito interjected, noting, “Upon reaching the point of viability does not the woman have the same interest that she had before viability in being free of this pregnancy that she no longer wants to continue?” Rikelman said viability is a principled line, and Alito said he was trying to see whether it was. “Agree with me at least on that point — that a woman still has the same interest in terminating her pregnancy after the viability line has been crossed?” Alito said.
