Shifts in Supreme Court put abortion in spotlight

With the confirmation of John Roberts expected later this week and another judicial nomination on the horizon, the widely anticipated jockeying for position on the issue of abortion already has begun.

The Bush administration has asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the ban on late-term abortions, signifying the first major conflict for the new Supreme Court on one of the nation's most contentious issues.

This is not a new initiative for Bush, who in 2003 attempted to overturn the previous Stenberg v. Carhart decision of 2000.

Robert Schapiro, a professor at Emory Law School said the decision in 2000 was made for two reasons.

"One, the definition was very vague and could have been interpreted to a broad range of second trimester abortions," he said. "Two, there was no exception included to protect the health of the mother."

In Bush's attempted reinstatement of the ban in 2003, he and his allies insisted that the new law provide a more specific description of the forms of abortion that would become illegal.

But, within two days of the law's enactment, abortion clinics in three states already had appealed to their district courts to prevent the law from taking effect.

The law eventually was declared unconstitutional due to its inability to provide a health exception for the mother.

The late-term abortion ban is up for debate again because of the uncertainty regarding the two new appointments.

"Justice (Sandra Day) O'Connor was the decisive vote, and the one who is nominated could likely have the swing vote," Schapiro said. "It (will be) an early indication as to John Robert's position on abortion."

Both sides of the issue already are making their voices heard, including the pro-life National Right to Life Committee and pro-choice organizations like the National Organization of Women and NARAL Pro-Choice America.

"The cases where there could be great movement are partial birth abortions cases because the decisions were so close," said Patricia Coll, a congressional liaison for NRLC.

"If the Supreme Court upholds the ban on partial birth abortion, thousands of premature infants could be spared a very gruesome death."

The news of Bush's attempt to reinstate the ban has angered many pro-choice advocates, including Ted Miller, a NARAL spokesman.

"This is a ban of abortion as early as the 12th week of a pregnancy," he said. "Three federal courts have found this ban unconstitutional. It's unconstitutional and doesn't include an exception to protect the mother."

While both sides of the issue have united to preserve or correct what they deem to be moral and right, the outcome of this issue is still very much unclear.

Although many believe that the pending nomination processes could sway the vote either way, Schapiro said he thinks that the decision made in 2003 will most likely stand.

"It should seem that Stenberg v. Carhart is on point, and as the lower federal courts have held, the partial birth abortion ban act is unconstitutional under that precedent."

 

Contact the State & National Editor at stntdesk@unc.edu.