When a expecting, undocumented 17-calendar year-previous being in a federal refugee shelter in Texas sought an abortion in 2017, it was the work of Scott Stewart, then a Division of Justice law firm, to help protect the ultimatum issued by the Trump administration: go as a result of with the pregnancy — or leave the region.
The girl experienced received a court buy allowing for her to have the procedure, but the authorities was stopping her from leaving the shelter for the appointment. That decision, Mr. Stewart argued, did not generate an undue burden on the minimal. “She can get relief with voluntary departure,” he argued.
A federal choose, declaring herself “astounded” by the argument, disagreed and requested the governing administration to allow for the minimal to go via with the abortion.
Mr. Stewart now finds himself when all over again at the center of a significant-profile abortion circumstance, a single that could direct to a single of the most consequential rulings on reproductive legal rights in many years.
Mr. Stewart, who was appointed the solicitor basic for Mississippi in February, on Wednesday will defend the state’s regulation prohibiting abortions just after 15 months of being pregnant and immediately problem Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, both equally of which affirmed the ideal to abortion prior to fetal viability.
“Roe and Casey are egregiously erroneous,” he wrote in the court docket transient. “The conclusion that abortion is a constitutional correct has no foundation in text, composition, heritage, or custom.”
Mr. Stewart graduated from Princeton College and researched regulation at Stanford. He clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Courtroom and Choose Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain of the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He served in the U.S. Office of Justice’s Workplace of Authorized Counsel and worked in private exercise as a litigator. As deputy assistant attorney basic in the Civil Division of the Justice Section, he offered additional than 40 oral arguments in the federal courts of appeals.