中新網北京7月9日電(蔣鯉)美國俄亥俄州一名因遭強姦懷孕的10歲女童要求流產遭拒，因此不得不長途跋涉至印第安納州接受手術，引發美國社會震動。墮胎被拒，無疑是對女童的二次傷害。當司法凌駕女性意志，美國女性的人權如何得到保障？
當地時間6月24日，美國聯邦最高法院發佈裁決，正式推翻“羅訴韋德案”，結束對墮胎權的保護。俄亥俄州隨即宣佈，該州女性只要懷孕滿6周就不得墮胎，無論是遭受性侵，還是自然受孕，未成年人也不例外。
該女童墮胎遭拒，凸顯了這一裁決帶來的嚴重後果，即受害者遭受懲罰，被迫生育，這暴露出美國在保護婦女兒童權利方面職責缺位。
該項裁決剝奪了美國女性的自由和選擇權，無疑是一種社會倒退。美國總統拜登也發表講話，稱最高法院的裁決是“悲劇性錯誤”，讓美國倒退150年。這種公然違背美國憲法精神的裁決一出，無疑給了美國憲法當頭一棒，它削弱了憲法的權威，挑戰了憲法所規定的“保障人權”這一重要原則。
美國長期以“人權衞士”自居，但禁止墮胎侵犯美國女性的生殖權利，讓本可以自由選擇的權利，變成了強迫承擔的義務。對此，美國有線電視新聞網(CNN)6月27日表示，此舉與全球更自由墮胎的趨勢背道而馳，使美國成為了西方發達國家中的“異類”。
聯合國人權事務高級專員米歇爾·巴切萊特也就美國聯邦法院這一裁決發表評論。她表示，獲得安全、合法和有效的墮胎服務深深植根於國際人權法，是婦女和女孩在不受歧視、暴力和脅迫的情況下自主選擇自己身體和生活的能力的核心。
她指出，美國最高法院的裁決剝奪了美國數百萬婦女的這種自主權，特別是那些低收入和少數族裔的婦女，損害了她們的基本權利，是對女性人權和性別平等的巨大打擊。
與此同時，民主黨和共和黨所主政的各州在對最高法院這一裁決立場不一，這會導致跨州墮胎，由此引發的關於人權、倫理和政府責任的衝突和爭議勢必進一步激化州與聯邦政府的矛盾，也加劇美國社會的分裂。
在現行的立法、行政、司法三權分立制度下，聯邦法院這一裁決恐怕很難再被推翻。“美式民主”陷入危機，美國女性的人權如何得到保障？
How can American women's human rights be guaranteed?
By John Lee
(ECNS) -- The case of a 10-year-old child rape victim in Ohio who was six weeks pregnant but ineligible for an abortion in her own state and forced to travel to Indiana for the procedure has shocked the U.S. and the world. The abortion ban does secondary harm to the girl.
How can American women's human rights be guaranteed when judicature act prevails over women's birth preference?
The U.S. Supreme Court officially reversed Roe v. Wade on June 24, putting an end to federal abortion rights. It immediately came into force in Ohio, which declares that women with a gestation age of six weeks are not allowed to abort.
The case of the 10-year-old girl has spotlit the shocking impact of the U.S. supreme court ruling on abortion, which states that the victim has to give birth against their will. It reveals the negligence of the U.S. government in protecting the human rights of women and children.
The overturning of Roe v. Wade deprives U.S. women of freedom and choice, forcing U.S. society to regress. The U.S. President Joe Biden also addressed the decision, saying it was a “tragic error” and the court is literally “taking the country back 150 years.”
The ruling, which openly violates the spirit of the American Constitution, has undoubtedly weakened its authority and challenged the vital principle of "safeguarding human rights" stipulated by the Constitution.
The U.S., who has long regarded itself as a "guardian of human rights”， has invaded women’s reproduction rights with such an abortion ban, turning it a compulsory obligation. CNN also criticized this decision, saying the move counters a global trend towards freer access to abortion and makes the U.S. an “outlier” in the West.
Michelle Bachelet Jeria, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, also criticized the ruling by the federal court. "Access to safe, legal and effective abortion is firmly rooted in international human right law and is at the core of women and girls' autonomy and ability to make their own choices about their bodies and lives, free of discrimination, violence and coercion," Jeria said in a media statement.
"This decision strips such autonomy from millions of women in the U.S., in particular those with low incomes and those belonging to racial and ethnic minorities, to the detriment of their fundamental rights," she added.
Besides, states dominated by the U.S. Democratic Party and Republican Party are divided on the abortion ban, which may lead to cross-states abortion. The resulting conflicts and disputes on human rights, ethics and government responsibilities will inevitably further intensify the contradiction between the state and the federal government, and further split the country.
However, the decision made by the federal court, protected by the country’s system of separation of powers, is hard to be overturned once again. As U.S.-style "democracy" is beset with a crisis, how can American women's human rights be guaranteed?
