A decision on whether a federal judge rightly ruled the anti-abortion law unconstitutional may not come until after the US Supreme Court ruled on Mississippi’s restrictive measures.

The state appeal against the federal judge’s ruling came before a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the 11th District. The presiding judge, Chief Judge William Pryor, suggested several times during the hearing that he was inclined to have the nation’s highest court settle the dispute over the Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks.

“The question I understand is being asked in (the Mississippi case), regardless of how the Supreme Court answers it – affirmative or negative – seems to me to have a direct bearing on the correct outcome of this controversy. “Said Pryor during the hearing on Friday.

“It doesn’t happen every day that … we can allow the Supreme Court to do something for us,” he also said. “It’s nice when it happens. Isn’t that one of those situations? “

Attorneys representing both sides of the lawsuit said they had no objection to waiting, although the opponent of Georgian law’s attorney stated that the implications of a Supreme Court ruling in the Mississippi case remain to be seen.

“I’m just pointing out that the court can do the job for you or they can appeal to a 15-week ban that bans far fewer abortions than the case here. Again, 87% of abortions are prohibited under this law, ”said Elizabeth Watson of the American Civil Liberties Union, who introduced the SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective and others who challenged Georgia law.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments in the Mississippi case on December 1, with a decision expected next year.

The Mississippi case, Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization threatens to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade decision that made access to abortion a constitutional right until a fetus is viable. The judges also recently voted in a 5: 4 ruling that a stricter Texas law can come into effect for the time being.

Georgian law of 2019 would ban most abortions after the fetus has heart activity, which is usually about six weeks and before many women know they are pregnant. However, a ruling by a federal judge last year prevented it from going into effect in Georgia, where women have access to abortion services until they are 20 weeks pregnant.

However, proponents of the Georgian law argue that the rest of the measure – such as a tax break for expectant parents – should go into effect. Prosecutor Jeffrey Harris called these changes “common sense for the welfare of the fetus” and argued that they will benefit women.

At least two of the judges on Friday – Pryor and Barbara Lagoa, one appointed by Trump; both allegedly made it onto the former president’s shortlist for a Supreme Court election – appeared receptive to that argument on Friday.

“How is it unconstitutional for a father to pay the cost of a pregnancy that he was partly responsible for?” Lagoa said, referring to another provision in Georgian law.

Could Parts of the Law Survive If Abortion Restriction Fails?

Opponents of the Georgia Act are pressing for the entire measure to be removed, including so-called “person” language.

“If a law forbids abortion, it’s unconstitutional – period – regardless of the root or the word it uses to get there,” said Sean Young, legal director for the ACLU in Georgia.

But anti-abortion supporters said they were hopeful on Friday that the rest of Georgia’s law could come into effect.

“We’re talking about a human life,” said Cole Muzio, president of the Frontline Policy Council, formerly known as the Family Policy Alliance. “And when we talk about a tax exemption, we are treating this child with the personality it deserves and recognizing the reality of what that means for the mother, having the expenses, and experiencing the reality of bearing a human child.”

Joshua Edmonds, executive director of the Georgia Life Alliance, defended the law “as just one more part of an overarching effort to build a culture that respects and protects all life in Georgia.” He said the judges on Friday seemed to understand.

“It was surprising to see how respectful the court appears to be towards the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling in June,” Edmonds said.

However, Staci Fox called the tax exemption and other elements of the law a “smoke screen” for what is essentially a 2019 ban on abortion lawmakers in hopes of overthrowing Roe against Wade.

Fox said Friday she expected judges to wait with a ruling on Georgian law until the Supreme Court ruled the Mississippi case next year. Fox is the President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast, one of the plaintiffs.

“I think we are all concerned about the politicization of the court and we would be irresponsible if we did not prepare for the possibility of possible impact, be it in Texas or elsewhere in the country,” Fox said, citing the Colonel Court of justice.

“Our job is to keep our doors open, continue abortion care, and remind people that abortion is safe and legal and available in the state of Georgia as these things develop,” she added.