Some Scalia's gem from Carhart:
(Link to transcripts of oral arguments: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts.html )

JUSTICE STEVENS: Whether the feet are more than halfway out, and some of these fetuses I understand in the procedure, are only four or five inches long. They are very different from fully formed babies.
GENERAL CLEMENT: Justice Stevens, again, you're right.
JUSTICE SCALIA: When it's halfway out, I guess you can call it either a child or a fetus.

JUSTICE SCALIA: Would it, would it be lawful or would it be infanticide to deliver the fetus entirely and just let it expire without any attempt to keep it alive?

Here are a few more from the second case:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: I understood the statute here to apply only when the, in the words of the statute, that the partially delivered INFANT is KILLED after passing the anatomical landmark. (I added the emphasis, in case anyone still had any doubts about Roberts' abortion views.)

But then Planned Parenthood, I thought, did a fantastic job. The quotes below are really a reflection of a true advocate.

MS. EVE C. GARTNER: If the woman and her doctor together agree that proceeding in this way is going to avert significant health risks to her, and the testimony here is overwhelming that there are situations where that occurs, this Court has never recognized a state interest that was sufficient to trump that woman's paramount interest in her health.

AND HERE:
If [the woman] would prefer that the fetus undergo demise before the extraction begins, some women may feel better about that. [...] it's a very personal question that really goes to the heart of this case. It's a very personal decision how the woman who has made this very difficult moral/religious decision to end her pregnancy, often for very tragic reasons, how does she want the fetus to undergo demise? Different people will have different views about this. But here Congress has legislated that for the woman and done so pre-viability, when the state interests really are insufficient to require the woman to undergo a procedure that is not marginally safer but significantly safer for her.

Way to go, Planned Parenthood! Still, I just doubt the Court, with it's current makeup, is even considering holding the laws unconstitutional.

I will have a longer article about this, but I don't see Kennedy voting to strike the law. At best, he might try to do an AYotte and read a health exemption into it, but given the tone of his dissent in Carhart he's not going to flip so far as to strike down the law.

Agreed. I think it will ultimately boil down to a 4-1-4 plurality, with Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas upholding the law, with Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Stevens striking down the law, and Kennedy offering up a partial concurrence that upholds the law but reads a health exception into it. Under those circumstances--as was the case with Breyer's concurrence in Hamdan--it will function as if Kennedy's concurrence was a 5-4 majority ruling.

Roberts' wife is former counsel for Feminists For Life, so I kind of figured he would be flush-right on reproductive rights issues. Alito is a little more of a wild card, but I'm probably kidding myself if I think he'll rule any differently than Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas on this one.

Cheers,

TH

From the WaPo article:

"If it weren't abortion, his opinion in the Oregon case would apply," said Karlan, who co-wrote the brief. "The hard thing in partial-birth abortion is that he has a visceral feeling and has already expressed distaste for the procedure."

Does it seem wrong to anyone that this septagenarian, however august, is deemed likely decide about laws that will affect women's ability to make decisions about their health based on his visceral feelings concerning a procedure he's never, ever going to have to consider undergoing?

Like, I have a visceral feeling of utter distaste surrounding reality TV, bananas, tapioca, and Paris Hilton, but I don't go around deciding policy on the basis of those feelings.

More coverage of the late-term abortion cases, from the pro-choice side, at RH Reality Check. Including guest blogs from Nancy Northup of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood affiliates, NARAL and others. Also, the personal story of a woman choosing to end a pregnancy in order to protect her health and a doctor who provides safe medical procedures.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/tag/supreme-court