Alabama Supreme Court rules frozen embryos are children as Chief Justice quotes bible in ruling writing: 'Life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God'
- Six judges in the state's highest court ruled in favor of the landmark decision, including Chief Justice Tom Parker who quoted the Bible
- The decision came in a lawsuit brought by a group of IVF patients whose frozen embryos were accidentally destroyed in December 2020
- One judge - Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook - issued a dissenting opinion, arguing that the decision was based on a 19th century law
Alabama's Supreme Court has ruled that frozen embryos are children and will therefore be given the same protections under state law.
Six judges in the state's highest court ruled in favor of the landmark decision, including Chief Justice Tom Parker who quoted the Bible and said it would protect 'the sanctity of unborn life'.
The decision came in a lawsuit brought by a group of IVF patients whose frozen embryos were destroyed in December 2020 when a patient removed them from a cryogenic storage unit and dropped them on the ground.
'Human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God, who views the destruction of His image as an affront to Himself,' Chief Justice Parker wrote.
'Even before birth, all human beings bear the image of God, and their lives cannot be destroyed without effacing his glory.'
![Six judges in the state's highest court ruled in favor of the landmark decision, including Chief Justice Tom Parker (pictured) who quoted the Bible and said it would protect 'the sanctity of unborn life'](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/20/13/81486357-13104315-image-a-6_1708435909600.jpg)
Six judges in the state's highest court ruled in favor of the landmark decision, including Chief Justice Tom Parker (pictured) who quoted the Bible and said it would protect 'the sanctity of unborn life'
![Alabama 's Supreme Court has ruled that frozen embryos are children and will therefore be given the same protections under state law](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/20/13/81485795-13104315-image-a-15_1708436168119.jpg)
Alabama 's Supreme Court has ruled that frozen embryos are children and will therefore be given the same protections under state law
![The decision came in a lawsuit brought by a group of IVF patients whose frozen embryos were destroyed in December 2020 when a patient removed them from a cryogenic storage unit and dropped them on the ground a the Center for Reproductive Medicine (pictured)](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/20/13/81486347-13104315-image-a-8_1708435940223.jpg)
The decision came in a lawsuit brought by a group of IVF patients whose frozen embryos were destroyed in December 2020 when a patient removed them from a cryogenic storage unit and dropped them on the ground a the Center for Reproductive Medicine (pictured)
One judge - Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook - issued a dissenting opinion, arguing that the decision was based on a 19th century law which was not designed to take modern fertility technology into account.
The plaintiffs in the IVF clinic case filed two lawsuits against the facility where the accident happened - the Center for Reproductive Medicine.
They alleged that the clinic was in violation of Alabama's Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, which applies to unborn babies.
'The relevant statutory text is clear: the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies on its face to all unborn children, without limitation,' the court's decision stated.
The group also accused the clinic of negligence and sought monetary compensation. This part of their claim is now being considered by the court.
Lawyers for the clinic had filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuits, which was granted by a trial court. It argued that a frozen embryo could not fall within the definition of a 'person' or 'child'.
Key to their argument was that the embryos were not inside a biological uterus - but the court fund that the law applies to all embryos no matter where they are located.
The defendants have said this ruling could have devastating consequences for families considering IVF in the future, by making it substantially more expensive as clinics will now worry about the cost of potential accidents and lawsuits.
But the court dismissed this as a concern for politicians, not the justice system.
'While we appreciate the defendants' concerns, these types of policy focused arguments belong before the Legislature, not this Court,' the ruling stated.
![There are also concerns about the impact of the historic ruling on reproductive rights. Campaigners say the ruling was concerning because it shows how a judge's religious beliefs could influence a 'deeply personal decision'](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/20/13/81485835-13104315-image-a-17_1708436226899.jpg)
There are also concerns about the impact of the historic ruling on reproductive rights. Campaigners say the ruling was concerning because it shows how a judge's religious beliefs could influence a 'deeply personal decision'
![One judge - Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook (pictured) - issued a dissenting opinion, arguing that the decision was based on a 19th century law which was not designed to take modern fertility technology into account](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/20/13/81485833-13104315-image-a-18_1708436243961.jpg)
One judge - Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook (pictured) - issued a dissenting opinion, arguing that the decision was based on a 19th century law which was not designed to take modern fertility technology into account
![Alabama 's Supreme Court has ruled that frozen embryos are children and will therefore be given the same protections under state law](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/20/13/81485827-13104315-image-a-7_1708435935456.jpg)
Alabama 's Supreme Court has ruled that frozen embryos are children and will therefore be given the same protections under state law
Dissenting judge Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook argued in his opinion that the court was overreaching by attempting to 'breathe life' into an outdated law about the protection of children.
He said the law, written in 1872, would not have taken into account the future existence of frozen embryos and to assume that it did would be a matter for the legislature.
There are also concerns about the impact of the historic ruling on reproductive rights.
Kelly Baden, vice president for public policy at the Guttmacher Institute, told the Washington Post the ruling was concerning because it shows how a judge's religious beliefs could influence a 'deeply personal decision'.
She added that the overturning of Roe v Wade had emboldened judges to restrict more than just abortion.
The Supreme Court last year voted to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe V Wade ruling that made abortion care legal and state abortion bans unconstitutional.
On June 24 2022 that right was overturned when a majority voted in the Mississippi case of Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization to state that there was not constitutional protection for abortion.
Within hours of the announcement, abortion clinics in some states were forced to close.
Since the court's ruling 21 states have banned or restricted access to abortion.