The Supreme Court weighed in on abortion restrictions Tuesday, but the result suggests justices aren't yet ready to tackle the core principles at issue in Roe v. Wade, according to early analysis in multiple outlets. In Tuesday's ruling, the court delivered good and bad news for both sides of the debate. Justices upheld an Indiana law requiring that fetal remains be buried or cremated, on par with other human remains, reports USA Today. However, the court let stand lower-court rulings that blocked another aspect of Indiana law, one that would ban abortions being done because tests revealed an abnormality with the fetus, or because the parents wanted a different gender or ethnicity. The early takes on what this mixed message means:
- Wall Street Journal: "The court's unsigned opinion appeared the product of a delicate compromise, and it stressed the justices weren't ready—for now—to consider whether either law violates the Constitution."
- CNN: "The fact that the court decided not to take up the more controversial provision of the Indiana law suggests that there is not a current appetite on the court to move aggressively to question the court's core abortion precedents of Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood."
- Washington Post: "The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to a compromise on a restrictive Indiana abortion law that keeps the issue off its docket for now."
- New York Times: "The modest move on Tuesday left for another day the consideration of state laws limiting abortion that were enacted, at least partly, to challenge the court's decision in 1973 in Roe v. Wade."
(Read more US Supreme Court