Agence France Presse (AFP News) - U.S. Supreme Court to Revisit Abortion

November 6, 2006
by Fanny Carrier

The US Supreme Court is set to revisit the always controversial topic of abortion Wednesday, weighing in on the constitutionality of a law banning a surgical method to terminate a pregnancy.

Opponents to legalized abortion are counting on two new judges appointed by President George W. Bush to thwart challenges to a 2003 law banning the abortion procedure used after the third month of pregnancy.

The law, passed with strong support from the president, has been tied up in court challenges and never implemented.

It is a "significant bellwether case simply because of the change in personnel" in the Supreme Court, said Randy Barnett, professor of Legal Theory at Georgetown University.

Opponents have dubbed the controversial method "partial birth abortion" because the arms and the torso of the fetus are delivered alive; the fetus does not die until doctors extract its brain.

They call it infanticide.

But pro-abortion rights activists challenge the 2003 law because it bans the procedure regardless of the mother's health.

The Supreme Court in 2000 invalidated a law on similar grounds in the midwestern state of Nebraska by a 5-4 vote. The justice who cast the swing ballot, Sandra Day O'Connor, was replaced last year by Samuel Alito, considered a hardline conservative.

On Wednesday, all eyes will be on the court's new Chief Justice John Roberts, who replaced the late William Rehnquist -- a conservative -- as well as on Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted in favor of the Nebraska law.

Jay Sekulow, with the American Center for Law and Justice, which opposes legalized abortion, declared that it was "the most important abortion case that the Supreme Court has taken since Roe v. Wade in 1973," which legalized abortion.

The most significant aspect of the case "would be if the Supreme Court acknowledges that Congress has an important role to play in this kind of policy decision," he said.

Sandford Cohen, a top official at the pro-choice Center for Reproductive Rights, said the 2003 law "is part of a larger anti-choice agenda to eliminate safe, legal abortions at any cost, including unashamedly endangering women's health and lives."

"Women, in consultation with their doctors, not politicians, should make decisions regarding pregnancy care," she said.

In a unanimous decision in January, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a law in the state of New Hampshire stating that parents must be notified before an underage daughter obtains an abortion -- but even in that case allowed an exception if the girl's health was threatened.

Lacking new elements in the case, the justices may be reluctant to vote against the precedent set in the 2000 case.

If the court rules against the 2003 law, abortion foes are ready with another case -- voters in the midwestern state of South Dakota will cast ballots Tuesday on a measure that would outlaw all abortions except if the pregnant woman's life is endangered.

There are no national statistics on abortion in the United States. According to estimates, around 10 percent of the roughly 1.2 million annual voluntary abortions take place after the third month of pregnancy, and the method in question affects a few thousand of those.