Supreme Court coverage
The news is spreading about today’s ruling and its significance.
The Supreme Court changed course on abortion today, upholding a national ban on a disputed midterm abortion procedure and ruling that the government has “a legitimate and substantial interest in preserving and promoting fetal life.”
The 5-4 decision marks the first time the court has upheld a ban on an abortion procedure. A similar ban was struck down seven years ago, but the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and President Bush’s choice of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. tipped the balance in favor of the ban on “partial-birth abortions.”
Today’s ruling does not directly challenge the basic right to abortion set in Roe vs. Wade, but it gives states and the federal government more leeway to impose “reasonable regulations” on abortion doctors.
And that’s the vital ‘tipping point.’
The government has “an interest in promoting respect for human life at all stages in the pregnancy,” said Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, speaking for the court. “The law need not give abortion doctors unfettered choice in the course of their medical practice.”
This is Kennedy at his best.
Kennedy said the ban on partial-birth abortions may “encourage some women to carry the infant to full term, thus reducing the absolute number of late-term abortions.”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Alito joined Kennedy’s opinion.
How clearly and powerfully this illustrates the importance of a presidential election, as I noted in the post below, because of a president’s ability to select Supreme Court justices.
While partial-birth abortions constitute only a relatively small percentage of the overall numbers of abortions performed in this country every year, they provide the clearest and most inarguably brutal picture of killing a child…at will.
Most abortions — between 85-90% — are done in the first three months of pregnancy, and the fetus is removed through a suction tube. But later in a pregnancy, some form of surgery is required.
At this stage, most doctors give the woman anesthesia and use instruments to remove the fetus in pieces. This procedure is known as a “dilation and evacuation,” or D & E.
Some doctors believed it was safer and less risky to remove the fetus intact. They said this procedure resulted in less chance of injury, bleeding or infections. Usually, doctors would crush the skull, or drain its content, to permit its removal. This method has been referred to as a “dilation and extraction,” or D & X.
This D & X procedure was made a crime by Congress in the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Advocates said it was akin to “infanticide” because the unborn child could be alive when it was being removed and its skull crushed.
Kennedy made clear he found the procedure abhorrent as well. Speaking in the court, he said some women regret their decision to have an abortion. She would suffer “grief more anguished and sorrow more profound when she learns, only after the event, that she allowed a doctor to pierce the skill and vacuum the fast-developing brain of her unborn child.”
Coverage of this decision will continue to unfold in all kinds of interesting ways. If you’re on the internet this afternoon around 4-5 pm CST (5-6 pm EST), I’ll be talking with Paul Clemens on WLCR-am radio.
We’ll also be discussing my article on ‘Media Bias’ in the current issue of Crisis Magazine.
