Abortion is Too Big to Regulate, Too Sacrosanct to Question Its Safety? | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

ACLJ Profile Completion

Verified

Abortion is Too Big to Regulate?

By Walter M. Weber1457024206435

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday heard oral argument in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, a case dealing with abortion regulation – the biggest abortion case at the high Court in over a decade.

At issue are two safety regulations:  the requirement that abortionists have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, and the requirement that abortion facilities meet the basic safety standards required of ambulatory surgical centers.

The challenged regulations are fairly modest. What is not modest was the argument several Justices and President Obama’s Justice Department made against the regulations.

For example, Justice Kagan, an Obama appointee, argued that the regulations were unconstitutional because (1) other procedures, like colonoscopies and liposuction, are riskier than abortion, and (2) Texas does not set the same safety standards for those procedures as for abortions. Justice Sotomayor, another Obama appointee, picked up the same theme. And Justices Breyer and Ginsburg, both Clinton appointees (notice a pattern?), protested that there was no health problem here and that abortion is certainly safer than childbirth, rendering these safety regulations unconstitutional.

Personally, I am doubtful that the probe of a colon or the suctioning of body fat is in fact more dangerous than suctioning or cutting a baby out of the mother's womb or injecting that baby or the mother with poisons to cause an abortion. But let's assume that in fact these other procedures pose greater risks:  Since when is a safety regulation unconstitutional because it did not start at the most dangerous activity?

If that were the rule, every gun or airplane safety regulation would presumably be unconstitutional. The Second Amendment protects a right to bear firearms, and the Supreme Court says there is a constitutional right to travel. There are certainly other activities – bicycling? driving a car? – that are more dangerous than gun ownership or riding in an airplane. Does that mean any gun or airplane safety regulation not applied to these other activities is therefore unconstitutional?

The Supreme Court has never adopted such an approach, and it should not start now. Legislatures are allowed to attack one problem at a time and to choose the problems they attack. And there is no constitutional rule that abortions have to be the "least safe" activity before they may be regulated for safety. Let's hope a majority of the Supreme Court makes that perfectly clear.

And if you want documentation on how abortion is in fact a serious health hazard, contrary to the wishful thinking of abortion apologists, take a look at our amicus brief in this case.  In fact, the Texas Solicitor General cited our brief by name in response to a question by Justice Ginsburg on this topic.  In it, we expose, in painstaking detail, numerous instances of women injured and even killed because of unsafe, botched abortions.

Abortion cannot be too big to regulate.

Shut Down Deadly Abortion Clinics

Pro Life  Signatures

LOGIN

Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.

$20
$40
$60
$120
$240
Make this a monthly tax-deductible gift.

We're filing a critical Supreme Court brief in the biggest abortion case in 25 years to defend unborn babies. Have your gift doubled today.

Email Address is required.
First Name is required.
Last Name is required.
Credit Card Number is required.
Verification Code is required.
Expiration Month is required.
Expiration Year is required.
Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.
Encourage your friends to sign and donate by sharing this petition.
Latest in
Pro Life

Defending Crisis Pregnancy Centers

By Erik Zimmerman1519138800000

Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) are local, non-profit organizations dedicated to helping people who are facing difficult decisions concerning a pregnancy. They are often faith-based and would never refer for abortions due to their religious and moral beliefs. In fact, their very reason for...

read more

Life is Beautiful and Worth Fighting For

By Olivia Summers1518451963196

Since 2010, Gerber has held a “cutest baby” contest, and the winning baby is awarded with cash prizes and title of “Gerber Spokesbaby” for the year. Gerber “choose[s] the baby who best exemplifies Gerber’s longstanding heritage of recognizing that every baby is a Gerber baby.” This year, Gerber...

read more

U.N. Seeks to Redefine Life to Justify Deaths

By ACLJ.org1518210229339

Committee members at the United Nations seem confused about the definition of “the right to life” as they currently work to reinterpret those words to justify abortion, even for babies with disabilities. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Right (ICCPR) states: “Every...

read more

Cecile Richards Steps Down From Planned Parenthood

By ACLJ.org1517523759171

Just days after the 45th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and the court-ordered legalization of abortion, Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood announced she would be retiring after twelve of arguably the most profitable and controversial years in the history of the abortion giant. One thing...

read more