Supreme Court Abortion Case: Phony History Returns

A discussion of the history of abortion law occupied several minutes of the oral argument before the Supreme Court last Wednesday. Much of what was said was false or misleading.

Julie Rikelman, the lawyer for the clinic challenging Mississippi’s ban on abortion after 15 weeks, gave voice to that misinformation under searching questioning from Justice Samuel Alito. But she did not come up with it herself. A fake and sometimes fraudulent version of history has been a staple of abortion advocacy since the 1960s.

About the Author

Ramesh Ponnuru

Ramesh Ponnuru is the editor of National Review, a columnist for the Washington Post, and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

Featured Tags

A discussion of the history of abortion law occupied several minutes of the oral argument before the Supreme Court last Wednesday. Much of what was said was false or misleading.

Julie Rikelman, the lawyer for the clinic challenging Mississippi’s ban on abortion after 15 weeks, gave voice to that misinformation under searching questioning from Justice Samuel Alito. But she did not come up with it herself. A fake and sometimes fraudulent version of history has been a staple of abortion advocacy since the 1960s.