ACLJ Asks Supreme Court to Reject False Assertion That Abortion is Safer Than Childbirth in Brief Field in CA Partial-Birth Abortion Case

August 3, 2006

(Washington, DC) The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which focuses on constitutional law, today filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court of the United States in a California partial-birth abortion case asking the high court to reject arguments that abortion is medically safer than childbirth.  The ACLJ also has filed an amicus brief with the high court in the Nebraska partial-birth case in support of the constitutionality of the national ban on partial-birth abortion.

Yet again we see the proponents of abortion making the false assertion that abortion is actually safer than childbirth, said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, which litigates pro-life issues.  That assertion is not only inaccurate but in fact is the reverse of the truth, which is that abortion is more dangerous than childbirth.  Our brief, with careful documentation, explodes the myth of abortion as safer than childbirth.

With two cases now before the high court involving the constitutionality of the national ban on partial-birth abortion, we are hopeful the Justices will once and for all put an end to the horrific procedure that can only be described as infanticide, Sekulow added.

The ACLJ today filed its amicus brief with the high court in the case of Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America (No. 05-1382). 

The brief addresses the oft-repeated misconception that abortion has been proven to be safer than childbirth.  The ACLJ brief explains that the comparison of maternal mortality and abortion mortality statistics is akin to mixing apples and oranges and cannot be compared one-to-one.  Further, the brief asserts the comparison is invalid because the data itself is inaccurate and incomplete.

The brief also cites numerous published research studies in this country and abroad as evidence that strongly indicates that abortion, rather than being safer than childbirth, is in fact more dangerous.

The brief concludes:   In sum, there is ample reason to believe that abortion is detrimental to maternal health and, if anything, more likely to lead to death or other adverse consequences than is continuing the pregnancy.  This Court should take with a very large grain of salt any assertion that abortion is healthy for women, much less some sort of panacea.  There is good reason to believe precisely the contrary.

In the California case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court ruling declaring the national ban on partial-birth abortion unconstitutional.  In addition, the high court is considering a case out of Nebraska where lower courts rejected the constitutionality of the ban as well.  In the Nebraska case (Gonzales v. Carhart, No. 05-380), the ACLJ filed an amicus brief with the high court representing some 80 members of Congress and more than 320,000 Americans asking the high court to uphold the ban.

The high court will hear oral arguments in both cases this fall and issue decisions in 2007.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice specializes in constitutional law and focuses on pro-life litigation.  The ACLJ is based in Washington, D.C.