Washington Hotlist - Politics 2.0

Partial Birth Abortion Ban Upheld

April 18, 2007 – 12:49 pm

Yet another 5-4 ruling for the new Chief Justice that was supposed to bring consensus and legal clarity to the “court of last resort.” This time, Justice Kennedy was the swing vote and joined the majority. One wonders if this would have come out the other way if retired Justice O’Connor was still on the bench instead of her replacement, Justice Alito.

The Court held that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman’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 Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.

Banning a procedure which is rarely used and almost exclusively as a last resort for women without any viable medical alternative certainly places an undue burden on someone that desires to have an abortion, a clear violation of the standard that was developed by the majority of Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992. Besides, this is the type of decision that should be made privately by a woman and her doctor, not by publicly elected officials. Whatever happened to the Republican Party of small government and individual liberties? Either way, it sure shines a spotlight on the 2008 presidential candidates regarding their views of abortion and how they specifically view this procedure.

  1. 8 Responses to “Partial Birth Abortion Ban Upheld”

  2. This case was hopefully decided on the basis of its constitutional merits.
    The majority have ruled that the case had not been proved.
    The court is expected to act in such fashion, at least outwardly.
    Their personal opinions may never be known.

    By DAD on Apr 18, 2007

  3. Well said D__.

    I may be a flaming liberal, but I don’t believe that any woman has the right to murder another human being, unless she might die as a consequence of non-murder.

    By Vince Williams on Apr 20, 2007

  4. Or in cases of incest or rape. But it’s still murder, no matter the fancy footwork to justify it, or the screams of NOW types.

    By Vince Williams on Apr 20, 2007

  5. Issues of murder aside,the procedure is so blatantly brutal that, given the current state of the art in medicine, one finds it hard to understand how a pregnancy could be allowed to advance to such a stage that it would require termination in such fashion.

    I’ve witnessed the delivery of stillborns in far more civil fashion.

    By DAD on Apr 21, 2007

  6. PS:

    Re: Intact Dilation and Extraction on Wikepedia

    By DAD on Apr 21, 2007

  7. I agree, D__.

    By Vince Williams on Apr 22, 2007

  8. Who is this Joshua Rosenstock person and why does he think that anything he has to say is relevant? I stumbled on to his YouTube videos by accident and it’s obvious that he has no clue about any of these issues. These are all talking points straight from the moveon.org.

    By Dennis on Apr 23, 2007

  9. Suppose you explore 1938 Media and find out. You might also consider taking part in our jousting matches.

    In doing so, we might gain some insight into what YOU do and don’t have a clue about…and you…about us!

    By DAD on Apr 23, 2007

Post a Comment