Kaul’s office also argues the pre-Civil War-era law should not be in effect because it contradicts subsequent state laws that were passed to regulate abortion in the wake of Roe v. Wade.
That argument relies on the legal principle of “implied repeal,” said Bryna Godar, a staff attorney with the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School. “This is something that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has explained in prior cases,” Godar said. “An older law becomes unenforceable if there are newer laws that directly conflict with it.”