http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/the-next-abortion-case-is-here/?

_r=1

The case of Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition is the focal point in the article "The Next Abortion Case is Here". The case deals with a proposed law to limit doctors' abilities to prescribe the so called "abortion pill", otherwise known as RU-486; it was struck down by Oklahoma's Supreme Court. The case in and of itself is procedurally messy, the justices of the Supreme Court have found it difficult to determine what all the law entitles; therefore, the Supreme Court is deferring scheduling it for argument until clarification on the law is received by the state. This does not have a time limit, meaning the case could or could not be heard months from now. The modern usage of Mifeplex, the scientific name of the "abortion pill", differs from the past; instead of 600 milligrams, which was the common dosage, 200 are used. Doctors have found that the pill can be safely and effectively used up to 63 days, differing from the previous 49 day FDA approved regulation. Furthermore, women are able to take the second dosage at home rather than attending a mandatory doctor's visit. The case, although relatively unknown, is extremely controversial many believe that it is part of a mass movement to ban, restrict, or control the ability a young woman has to receive an abortion. The likelihood of this case being heard is unknown due to this aspect as well as the fact that key terminology throughout the law is unclear.

This article applies to chapter two in the AP Government and Politics textbook because the case mentioned is involved in the judicial review process. According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court is to handle matters that may or may not violate the constitutional rights of the American people. This brilliant stroke was added to ensure that government at a local, state, and national level did not diminish the unalienable rights our Constitution promises. Under Roe v. Wade, a historic case for women's rights, a woman is guaranteed the right to an abortion up to the time of the third trimester. The defendants in this case believe that the law proposed in Oklahoma do not violate this right, as it does not explicitly state that abortion through a medical medicine is banned, although the state's Supreme Court believes otherwise; therefore, the matter is being reviewed at a national level to determine whether or not is breaches said right. When and if the case is heard, the Justices must fulfill their duty to the country and decide whether or not the proposed law infringes on personal liberties. In my own personal belief, however, the state of Oklahoma does have the proper authority to pass such a law, however heinous it may be. The tactics it is using to regulate abortion, however, come extremely close to violating this essential right. Personal beliefs seem to have flooded the eyes of the law.