[Apologetics] More on the new U.S. Supreme Court ruling on partial birth abortion

[Art Kelly]

More on the new U.S. Supreme Court ruling on partial
birth abortion.

Art

Supreme Court upholds late-term abortion ban
Story Highlights• 5-4 ruling could open door to
revisiting Roe v. Wade

• Justice Kennedy: Law does not violate constitutional
right to abortion
• New justices Alito, Roberts provided solid
conservative majority to uphold ban
• Federal law has never gone into effect pending court
rulings

By Bill Mears
CNN Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court on Wednesday
upheld a law that banned a type of late-term abortion,
a ruling that could portend enormous social, legal and
political implications for the divisive issue.

The sharply divided 5-4 ruling could prove historic.
It sends a possible signal of the court's willingness,
under Chief Justice John Roberts, to someday revisit
the basic right to abortion guaranteed in the 1973 Roe
v. Wade case.

At issue is the constitutionality of a federal law
banning a rarely performed type of abortion carried
out in the middle-to-late second trimester.

The legal sticking point was that the law lacked a
"health exception" for a woman who might suffer
serious medical complications, something the justices
have said in the past is necessary when considering
abortion restrictions.

In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy, the
key swing vote in these divided appeals, said the
federal law "does not have the effect of imposing an
unconstitutional burden on the abortion right." He was
joined by his fellow conservatives, Justices Antonin
Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Roberts.

In a bitter dissent read from the bench, Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg, the only woman on the high court, said
the majority's opinion "cannot be understood as
anything other than an effort to chip away a right
declared again and again by this court, and with
increasing comprehension of its centrality to women's
lives."

The Justice Department and abortion rights groups have
offered differing views of the legislation's impact on
women's overall second trimester access to the
procedure, and whether the procedure is ever medically
necessary.

This was the first time the high court had heard a
major abortion case in six years, and since then, its
makeup has changed, with Roberts and Alito now on
board.

Their presence on the bench provided the solid
conservative majority needed to allow the federal ban
to go into effect, with Kennedy providing the key
fifth vote for a majority.

Alito replaced Sandra Day O'Connor, a key abortion
rights supporter over her quarter century on the
bench.

Doctors call this type of late-term abortion an
"intact dilation and evacuation." Abortion foes term
it a "partial-birth abortion."

Three federal appeals courts had ruled against the
government, saying the federal Partial-Birth Abortion
Ban Act of 2003 is unconstitutional because it does
not provide a "health exception" for pregnant women
facing a medical emergency. The outcome of this latest
challenge before the court's new ideological makeup
could turn on the legal weight given past rulings on
the health exception.

In states where such exceptions are allowed, the lists
of possible health risks include severe blood loss,
damage to vital organs and loss of fertility. Court
briefs noted pregnant women having the procedure most
often have their health threatened by cancer, heart
disease, high blood pressure or risk of stroke.
Doctors are given the discretion to recommend when the
late-term procedure should be performed.

The federal law has never gone into effect, pending
the outcome of nearly three years of legal appeals.

Specifically, the ban encompasses what doctors call
"intact dilation and evacuation" (also known as IDX),
which Congress in its legislation termed inhumane.

It is a rarely used second-trimester procedure,
designed to reduce complications to the woman. More
common is "dilation and evacuation" (D&E), used in 95
percent of pre-viability second-trimester abortions,
according to Planned Parenthood. Both are generally
performed after the 21st week of pregnancy.

A major part of the legal dispute was whether the
federal ban also includes the relatively more common
"standard D&E abortions." The government contends the
law does not, and is sufficiently narrow not to place
an "undue burden" on a woman's reproductive choices.

Raw numbers were also at the heart of the debate,
because the two sides disagreed on how often the
procedure is performed. Solicitor General Paul
Clement, the Justice Department's top lawyer before
the court, suggested it is rarely performed, and that
other medical options are available, so banning it
would therefore not be a real barrier to women.

Abortions rights supporters say "intact" abortions are
a medically accepted pre-viability, second-trimester
procedure.

Since the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion,
some states have tried to place restrictions and
exceptions on access to the procedure, prompting a
string of high court "clarifications" on the issue
over the years.
 
Find this article at: 
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/18/scotus.abortion/index.html


ART KELLY, ATM-S
13524 Brightfield Lane
Herndon, Virginia 20171-3360
(703) 904-3763 home
(703) 396-6956 work
arthurkelly at yahoo.com
art.kelly at cox.net
ArtK135 at Netscape.net

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com