High Court Upholds Ban On Some Abortions

Supreme Court Narrowly Upholds Law Banning Controversial Abortion Procedure

(CBS/AP)  The Supreme Court upheld the U.S. ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

It's the first federal ban on any kind of abortion since the Court established the right to an abortion in Roe vs. Wade, says CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews.

The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's U.S. constitutional right to an abortion.

The opponents of the act "have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion. He said Congress was justified in finding the procedure "similar to the killing of a newborn infant."

The ruling is huge, because the ban is now the first abortion restriction ever approved, with no exception for the health of the mother, said Andrews.

"No matter which side you are on, this is a landmark ruling in the history of abortion law in this country," CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen said. "The court has endorsed a federal ban that criminalizes doctors who perform this procedure even when they believe the health of the woman involved is at risk. And the ruling, I think, opens the door to future restrictions on abortion rights as well."

The decision pitted the court's conservatives against its liberals, with President Bush's two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, siding with the majority.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia also were in the majority.

"This ruling is all about Justice Samuel Alito," Cohen said. "He provided the fifth vote to uphold the federal law banning the practice and he is the reason this case came out differently than its predecessor case did. I don't think anyone on or off the court who has followed this closely believes that Sandra Day O'Connor would have okayed Congress' action here."

It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how — not whether — to perform an abortion.

President Bush hailed the ruling, saying it affirms the progress his administration has made to defend the "sanctity of life."

"I am pleased that the Supreme Court has upheld a law that prohibits the abhorrent procedure of partial birth abortion," he said. "Today's decision affirms that the Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and humanity of America."

Supporters of abortion rights were outraged, reports CBS News correspondent Barry Bagnato.

Even though the number of such banned abortions is small and mostly confined to the third trimester, those who sought to have the law overturned say it can now apply to thousands of second trimester abortions, when the woman's doctor thinks partial delivery is the safest course.

"This decision not only threatens women's health and the practice of medicine, and the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship, it threatens the fundamental dignity of women," said Kate Michelman, former head of NARAL Pro-Choice America.

She predicted that if President Bush gets to appoint one more justice on the court, Roe vs. Wade will be overturned.

Dr. LeRoy H. Carhart, who was plaintiff in Stenberg v. Carhart in 2000 when the Court struck down a Nebraska law banning such abortions, rued today's ruling. "When the Supreme Court considered this issue seven years ago, they agreed that women’s health was a paramount concern and doctors, not politicians, were in the best position to decide what procedures were safest. What a difference seven years, a new President, and two new justices, can make."

But opponents of abortion rights say the court did the right thing.

"Certainly we saw with that horrible tragedy at Virginia Tech how tenuous life is and how valuable it is," Ann Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League said. "Every child is important whether that child is a college student or that child is in the womb."

Abortion rights groups have said the specific procedure sometimes is the safest for a woman. They also said that such a ruling could threaten most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy, although government lawyers and others who favor the ban said there are alternate, more widely used procedures that remain legal.

Opponents of the ban also argue the law could apply to women like Mary Vargas, whose late-term fetus suffered kidney failure in the womb, and was fated to die. Her choice, she says, was between giving birth — where the child would suffer and die — or the kind of abortion that is now illegal.
"It's wrong for this law to exist at all," Vargas said. "Nobody could have agonized over the decision the way my husband and I did."

The outcome of today's federal ruling is likely to spur efforts at the state level to place more restrictions on abortions.

[pudd54]

Since the court has started making clinical decisions for physicians, I wonder how long it will be before doctors must consult a lawyer prior to doing any procedure.

[heartohmy]

It is the woman that should be able to decide what happens to her life and body.Government wants to decide then they should pay to raise these babies.Alot of woman would keep them if they had the resorces to do so.But then tax payers complain about money spent on these kids and their mothers.Until the baby takes it's first breath ,it should be the mother to decide their fate.Freedom to choose should be the womans right.It is her body and her life.Freedom in America is dyeing.

[rhs648]

For over 30 years the Supreme Court has declared the issue of abortion off-limits to state and federal legislators. Whereas legislators can pass thousands of laws that pertain to guns, cigarettes, and alcohol, they have not been allowed to tamper with abortion. Abortion is no longer the holy grail. Perhaps we will begin to see some balance now. If legislators can make laws that affect our daily lives, why must abortion be off-limits?

[randalds]

Well, one thing I do know. Republicans have an interest in "babies" just so long as they are wrapped in someone elses womb. When they are born, then they are on their own.

Posted by kansas1946 at 11:56 PM : Apr 19, 2007

Well that's not completely true. Some of them sure seem to have warm feelings for the young boys too.

[kansas1946]

Well, one thing I do know. Republicans have an interest in "babies" just so long as they are wrapped in someone elses womb. When they are born, then they are on their own. Do you know the Republicans actually passed a bill that no teenager under the age of eighteen that go pregnant could qualify for aid. Do you know that foster care programs are underfunded, understaffed, and children are in grave risk if funneled into that system. The Republicans have voted again and again to cut funding for programs that benefit children. So little baby, don't count on the Republicans to care for you when you enter the world.

[booyaw_77]

I'm voting for Hillary. Then woooooeeeee ohhhh boy.. bakata.

[kemetorigin]

Finally justice for babies.

[gslinger3]

This day is a day of celebrating a great VICTORY for the unborn child! Now we should focus on overturning Roe V Wade and stop this bloody murder that takes place.

Thank You President Bush and the SUPREME court!!

[oleander8]

A woman having the "right to choose" does NOT mean she personally would choose abortion versus delivering a child. But neither would she take away another woman's right to choose. That is the basic difference between pro-choice and pro-life groups. It's a personal, personal decision.

[soldat44]

"forcing of women to keep their unwanted babies"
Posted by r_bayless at 01:46 PM : Apr 19, 2007


Then do not commit to the conjugal act that creates life as God intended.

A little self-discipline is all God asks from us. Which is a far cry less than He asked His Only Son.

God Be With You.

[soldat44]

Keep your religion off my right to choose.
Posted by oleander8 at 12:20 PM : Apr 19, 2007


Your 'Right to Choose' what?

Please support, scientifically and morally, your position.

God Bless

[soldat44]

I don't care what words you try to hide behind it is still killing another human being. Go and research how partial birth abortions are performed. It is disgusting and it is murder. Go and look at the pictures of the development of a fetus. You can't hide the pictures and you can't hide the facts.
Posted by theUSA1st at 12:37 PM : Apr 19, 2007


God Bless You

[theusa1st]

Keep your religion off my right to choose.
Posted by oleander8 at 12:20 PM : Apr 19, 2007

In the Balkins they called it "Ethnic Cleansing".
The abortion proponents call it "a right to choose".

I don't care what words you try to hide behind it is still killing another human being. Go and research how partial birth abortions are performed. It is disgusting and it is murder. Go and look at the pictures of the development of a fetus. You can't hide the pictures and you can't hide the facts.

[gaye5]

swwils you are so right, a woman does have the righ to not have a baby if she chooses..well then DONT GET PREGNANT.. simple...
It is shear selfishness for a woman to run around having *** without any protection and then when she gets pregnant she decides that the child can just be cut out of her body... some of these babies just refuse to die, they lay there whimpering like kittens.. yep just get rid of it swwils, dont have it adopted out to a loving family who desperately wants a precious baby to love, just have the drs insert a needle and force saline into the womb to burn the baby till it dies in terrible pain...who throws its tiny helpless arms and legs around in so much pain until it slowly dies... ,, yep girl that is the way to go...
I think you need to look up pictures of aborted babies to see what these animals do to your baby when they killed it, and they happily do it all for your money... but of course I doubt that you will...their pretty little faces never to see their loving mother ever..
hmmm or maybe they will????

[oleander8]

Men can prevent abortion before conception - after that it's a woman's issue - so but t-out

[oleander8]

"Unnatural birth control is a sin." [Posted by soldat44]

Your definition of "sin" is not necessarily everyones definition of "sin".

Keep your religion off my right to choose.

[soldat44]

Unfortunately, the same people who want to make abortion illegal tend to want to also prevent *** ed and birth control. To me, that is immoral.
Posted by realpatriot1 at 11:23 AM : Apr 19, 2007

Natural Family Planning has a higher rate of 'birth control' than 'The Pill or Condoms'. Check your facts.

Unnatural birth control is a sin.

God Bless.

[gaye5]

aarikabutts you said..A very sad day for womens rights..... yes you are so right, women do have rights... read below...
we cant have governments telling women what they can do with their bodies, we cant have governments stopping women allowing Drs to split open a beautiful little defenceless babies head to kill it just before it is born, or to tear it out limb by limb, or to use salt to burn the baby until it dies a little time later in horrific pain.

All women have the right to do to their bodies what they want, yes, but not someone elses body....
Women have the right to make sure that they dont get pregnant, but they dont have the right to take the life of someone else. But I supose justice is not ours, it appears that women who abort are more likely to get breast cancer. As an abortion is different to a mis-carriage where the body has allowed the baby to be misscarriaged...with an abortion the baby is suddenly pulled from the body.. I have seen photos of aborted babies and some of them were so cute and pretty..Sadly, even though abortionist are supposed to be sure they stop the baby's heart with a direct injection of potassium chloride some
babies are aborted alive more often than is known...even to the mothers, and they are left to die.
Lets watch the fight from the abortion clinics, they will loose millions of dollars of they loose this fight.

[wdrussell1]

The far righters want to take us back to a time when abortions were only available to the wealthy.
At least they are consistant in their wealthy worship.

[soldat44]

soldat44 you are truly a sick person!!!! Do yourself a favor and seek help!
Posted by grumpas at 10:09 AM : Apr 19, 2007



Peace be with you.