OK. So the AL court wasn't THAT stupid as to give cause for an easy appeal.

Do you think it is appealable at all? Sounds like they would have to attack the notion that a blastula (nod to the flightdoc) is a "baby". Which would be difficult. With Kitzmiller they were able to bring forth scientists to refute (point by point) the creationist stand, and therefore win the argument (and ruling). I recall at one point the judge called court into session saying "science class it starting" (or words to that effect). But with the blastula, it's not as cut-and-dried. It has the DNA of a human, but is it "human"? Per flightdoc, it isn't yet a baby by current definitions.

I'm still against legislating any of this. It's the woman's body, not the state's. But it is interesting how it may be argued.