Decriminalization of abortion by the Mexican Supreme Court.

In September 2021, the Mexican Supreme Court issued a decision disallowing any federal or local judicial authority to indict someone for the offense of voluntary or consensual abortion. This decision also declared unconstitutional penalties imposed on medical personnel who facilitate or assist such procedures. Furthermore, the Court decided that limiting access to abortion in cases of rape to a specific time frame was disproportionate. Later on, in September 2023, the Supreme Court confirmed that absolute criminalization of abortion was unconstitutional and declared that the rule supporting criminalization in the Federal Penal Code was without effects. Consequently, healthcare providers who work in public federal health institutions cannot be criminalized for guaranteeing the right to abortion. This article reviews the reasons advanced by the Supreme Court to guarantee the right of reproductive self-determination, as well as the effects of both decisions beyond the decriminalization of abortion by Mexican federal and state legislatures. The paper also examines the scope and limitations of these rulings and identifies the remaining challenges regarding voluntary abortion procedures in Mexico.

Morte e vida no debate sobre aborto: uma análise a partir da audiência pública sobre a ADPF 442 / Death and life in the abortion debate: an analysis based on the public hearing on ADPF 442

Resumo Partindo da premissa de que as pautas sobre direitos reprodutivos constituem uma gama de disputas políticas no campo da sexualidade e da reprodução, este artigo examina o debate travado na audiência pública sobre a Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) 442, ocorrida em agosto de 2018. A ação propõe a descriminalização do aborto induzido pela própria gestante ou com seu consentimento, até a 12ª. semana de gestação. Na audiência convocada pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal, 50 exposições de amici curiae foram realizadas, catalisando os atuais argumentos acionados no debate público sobre aborto no Brasil. O conteúdo da audiência pública (personagens, lugares, imagens, áudios, textos e vídeo) é tomado como material empírico desta pesquisa. Considerando a centralidade do argumento de defesa da vida/combate à morte, tanto nas exposições favoráveis quanto naquelas contrárias à ADPF, examinamos os distintos enquadramentos utilizados pelos atores políticos em cena, ao debater a problemática do aborto em termos de um embate entre morte e vida. Mais do que uma polissemia dos termos, trata-se de um embate que explicita hierarquias em relação à reprodução e à vida das mulheres.

Abstract Starting from the premise that the agenda on reproductive rights is home to political disputes in the field of sexuality and reproduction, this article reviews the debate held at the public hearing on the Argument of Noncompliance with a Fundamental Precept (Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental, ADPF) # 442 in August 2018. The lawsuit proposes the decriminalization of abortion induced by the pregnant woman herself or with her consent until the 12th week of gestation. At the hearing convened by the Supreme Court, 50 amicus curiae presentations were held, catalyzing the current arguments raised in the public debate on abortion in Brazil. The content of the public hearing (characters, places, images, audios, texts, and video) is taken as empirical material for this research. Considering the centrality of the defense of life/combating death argument, both in speeches for and against the ADPF, we examine the different frameworks used by political actors on the scene when debating the issue of abortion in terms of a clash between death and life. More than a polysemy, it is a clash that makes explicit hierarchies regarding reproduction and women's lives.