From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex parte Church

Supreme Court of Alabama
Feb 11, 2022
361 So. 3d 219 (Ala. 2022)

Opinion

1210187

02-11-2022

EX PARTE Meri CHURCH (In re: Meri Church v. City of Huntsville)

Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals (Huntsville Municipal Court, MU-20-11092188; Jerry S. Barclay, Judge; Court of Criminal Appeals, CR-20-0258) Samuel J. McLure of The Adoption Law Firm, Pike Road, for petitioner. Submitted on certiorari petition only.


Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals (Huntsville Municipal Court, MU-20-11092188; Jerry S. Barclay, Judge; Court of Criminal Appeals, CR-20-0258)

Samuel J. McLure of The Adoption Law Firm, Pike Road, for petitioner.

Submitted on certiorari petition only.

SELLERS, Justice.

WRIT DENIED. NO OPINION.

Bolin, Wise, and Stewart, JJ., concur.

Parker, C.J., concurs specially.

PARKER, Chief Justice (concurring specially).

I concur in denying the writ because the petition does not establish a ground for certiorari review under the procedural requirements of Rule 39, Ala. R. App. P. However, I agree with the following view expressed in Judge McCool's special concurrence in the Court of Criminal Appeals:

"[T]he present case does not in any way involve any of the current legal precedent concerning abortion. If it did, I would agree with Alabama Supreme Court Justice Mitchell's special writing in Magers v. Alabama Women's Center Reproductive Alternatives, LLC, 325 So. 3d 788, 791 (Ala. 2020), in which Justice Mitchell points out the constitutional deficiencies

of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 [93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147] (1973), and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 [112 S.Ct. 2791, 120 L.Ed.2d 674] (1992), and urges the United States Supreme Court to overrule those ‘highly regrettable decisions’ at the earliest opportunity. 325 So. 3d at 793."

Church v. City of Huntsville, 361 So. 3d 212, 219 (Ala. Crim. App. 2021) (McCool, J., concurring specially). As I have similarly urged before, see Hicks v. State, 153 So. 3d 53, 72-84 (Ala. 2014) (Parker, J., concurring specially); Ex parte Phillips, 287 So. 3d 1179, 1244-54 (Ala. 2018) (Parker, J., concurring specially), and as I did in joining Justice Mitchell's special concurrence in Magers, I continue to call upon the United States Supreme Court to overrule Roe and Casey.


Summaries of

Ex parte Church

Supreme Court of Alabama
Feb 11, 2022
361 So. 3d 219 (Ala. 2022)
Case details for

Ex parte Church

Case Details

Full title:Ex parte Meri Church. In re: Meri Church v. City of Huntsville

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Feb 11, 2022

Citations

361 So. 3d 219 (Ala. 2022)