Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Abortion Battle Moves to States Opponents Take Fight to Legislatures

Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Abortion Battle Moves to States Opponents Take Fight to Legislatures

Article excerpt

THE battle on Capitol Hill over what opponents call "partial-birth abortions" is just one facet of broad and growing effort to curb abortion in state legislatures across the nation.

This year alone, more than 200 bills seeking to limit access to abortion have been introduced in 47 state legislatures. Eighteen have been enacted.

In the Congress, the abortion issue has surfaced this session in some 20 different legislative areas - ranging from banning abortions in US military hospitals to elimination of abortion coverage in federal employees' health plans.

But the partial-birth or D&X abortion ban stands alone as the most significant innovation in anti-abortion strategy in recent years. The bill, expected to pass in the Senate yesterday, represents the first effort in Congress to ban a specific abortion procedure since abortion was proclaimed a constitutional right by the Supreme Court in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

Why has it taken abortion foes in Congress so long to try to outlaw a particular method? And why has the arena of the entire abortion battle shifted from the Supreme Court to the legislatures and the streets?

The answer lies within the Supreme Court itself.

In 1989 and again in 1992, the high court handed down key rulings that opened the door to abortion-rights challengers to restrict access to the procedure. The first ruling, a Missouri case called Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, let stand a law carrying numerous limits, including a prohibition on abortion in state facilities except to save the life of the mother. For the first time, four justices voted solidly against Roe.

Then in 1992, in a Pennsylvania case called Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court upheld further restrictions, including one requiring women to observe a waiting period before having an abortion. The Casey ruling reaffirmed the central tenet of Roe, that abortion before viability may not be banned. Viability is the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb.

But "the most important fallout from Casey is that it established a lower standard of scrutiny" for laws seeking to limit abortion rights, says Janet Crepps, a lawyer at the New York-based Center for Reproductive Law and Policy. Roe had established a requirement of "strict scrutiny"; in Casey, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor put in place a lower standard requiring that laws not place an "undue burden" on access to abortion. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.