South Dakota throws down the gauntlet

[esskreemr]

In a move most likely emboldened by President Bush's recent appointment of two new justices to the SCOTUS, South Dakota legistlators have passed a bill that bans nearly all forms of abortion. Unless fast-tracked, this is likely to take years to reach the Supreme Court but could have far reaching ramifications on our society as we know it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/....ap/index.html

PIERRE, South Dakota (AP) -- Legislation meant to prompt a national legal battle targeting Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, was approved Wednesday by the South Dakota Senate, moving the bill a step closer to final passage.

The measure, which would ban nearly all abortions in the state, now returns to the House, which passed a different version earlier. The House must decide whether to accept changes made by the Senate, which passed its version 23-12.

"It is the time for the South Dakota Legislature to deal with this issue and protect the lives and rights of unborn children," said Democratic Sen. Julie Bartling, the bill's main sponsor.

In related news, South Dakota's infant mortality rate is the at its highest level since 1999:

http://www.state.sd.us/news/showDoc.aspx?i=6173

There were 93 infant deaths in South Dakota in 2004, or a rate of 8.2 per 1,000 live births. That's well above the United States rate of 6.6 infant deaths per 1,000 live births for the same year (provisional data).

Hollingsworth said there was a significant disparity by race with the infant mortality rate for American Indians double that of whites, 13.3 per 1,000 live births compared to 6.9.

The data points to tobacco use and lack of early prenatal care as major risk factors for low birth weight and pregnancy complications which can result in infant death. The infant mortality rate of babies born to mothers who used tobacco during pregnancy was much higher than for non-users, 12.8 deaths per 1,000 compared to 7.2 for infants whose mother did not use tobacco.

There was also a strong link between early prenatal care and a lower infant mortality rate. The lowest infant mortality rate was among mothers who started prenatal care in their first trimester, 6.9 per 1,000 live births. The highest rate, 59.4, was among mothers who had no prenatal care.

"The numbers clearly point out that early prenatal and quitting tobacco use are important steps pregnant women can take to increase the chance of having a healthy pregnancy and a healthy baby," said the Secretary.

And its teen suicide rate remains the 3rd highest in the nation (as of 2001):

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/sp...cidefolo.shtml

Alaska 39.39 suicides per 100,000 residents aged 15-24
New Mexico 19.06
South Dakota 18.81
Idaho 18.29
Wyoming 17.68
Arizona 15.72
Montana 14.81
Maine 14.74
Colorado 14.74
Nevada 14.11
Kansas 13.73
Utah 13.73
Vermont 13.47

Way to prioritize guys!

[Zilverzmurfen]

"It is the time for the South Dakota Legislature to deal with this issue and protect the lives and rights of unborn children," said Democratic Sen. Julie Bartling, the bill's main sponsor.

I'd rather say it's time for them to let go of obsolete "values" and try to keep up with the new millenium.

[Feltan]

I look forward to this.

While I am sure others will disagree, this issue needs to be resolved by state legislatures not the courts. It should a state-by-state issue, rather than a "one size fits all" solution for the whole country.

Once upon a time, a SCOTUS appointment generated about as much interest as appointing the head of the IRS. Sure, there was a congressional hearing -- but it never used to be a blood-letting fight-to-the-death battle. It used to be that qualifications mattered, and a SCOTUS candidate's political convictions weren't even on the radar. Roe v. Wade has changed that, and our country is not better because of it.

I am perfectly fine with South Dakota only allowing abortion to save a mother's life; Ohio allowing for that reason and rape and incest as well, and California and Massachussets paying women sick leave to have third trimester abortions for any reason they want.

We have stuggled with this as a National issue for far too long. It polarizes our population -- and one side will never convince the other to moderate their position. For the sake of the Republic, let us resolve this in state legislatures.

The worst outcome is that states will have different laws for abortions; the best outcome is that states will have different laws for abortions.

Regards,
Feltan

[Inquartata]

Amen.

While I am in favor of extending an almost unlimited latitude to women where their own bodies are concerned, I am perplexed by the legal gymnastics needed to find a Constitutional issue in the limitation thereof by state governments.

[PiratePeter]

no one but people from south dakota should have the right to decide what they want their state to do in matters outside of the prescribed federal constitution.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by PiratePeter

no one but people from south dakota should have the right to decide what they want their state to do in matters outside of the prescribed federal constitution.

No one really disagrees with that statement.

Where you get the fuss is trying to figure out what are "matters outside of the prescribed federal constitution".....

--Philistine

[Inquartata]

Yes. And the Supreme Court has heretofore seemed to adhere to the Butterfly Theory with regard to the states and the Union...

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by PiratePeter

no one but people from south dakota should have the right to decide what they want their state to do in matters outside of the prescribed federal constitution.

Anyone with a strong stance on the issue (which seems to be 90% of the population at times...) will argue that it is unquestionably a federal issue, as it is a matter of life and death, unalienable rights, etc.


Personally, I'm feeling comfortable up here in the blue states.

[jBirch]

I'm kinda curious: under what logic is abortion a federal issue?

James

[telkanuru]

It's a medical issue and the federal government tends to have regulatory power there?

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by jBirch

I'm kinda curious: under what logic is abortion a federal issue?

Well--according to the US Congress--when it's a partial birth abortion ban.

The Supreme Court will be reviewing this next term, and I think there is currently a stay of the law--but IIRC, not on the basis of the lack of power of Congress to regulate it.

--Philistine

[jBirch]

Well somebody's out of jurisdiction then. How can both a state and the federal government legislate the same issue?

James.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by jBirch

I'm kinda curious: under what logic is abortion a federal issue?

James

Past Supreme Courts have professed to find an inherent right to privacy in the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments, protected by the due process clause of the 14th...even though no such right is anywhere mentioned in the actual wording of the Constitution. The protection of the right to abortion is thought to spring from that right to privacy. Frankly I'm surprised it wasn't the Commerce Clause of Article I that was chosen---that seems to be the favorite justification for most other "progressive" federal government powers.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by telkanuru

It's a medical issue and the federal government tends to have regulatory power there?

It can only regulate medicine insofar as interstate commerce is affected. That is, it can regulate medical devices and drugs because these are sold and transported throughout the country. But medicine itself, licensing of physicians and setting of standards and so on, is the province of the individual states.

I'm sure that any right-thinking Supreme Court justice could puzzle out a rationale by which a woman seeking an abortion somehow affected interstate commerce. They've done so for less obvious practices in the past.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

{snip}Frankly I'm surprised it wasn't the Commerce Clause of Article I that was chosen---that seems to be the favorite justification for most other "progressive" federal government powers.

No, it's the Commerce Clause that is being used to prevent partial-birth abortions. That seems to be the favorite justification for most other "conservative" federal government powers.....

--Philistine

[Gav]

So they ban it in some states but others. What happens when the abortion seeker crosses borders, has the abortion and then goes home. Doesn't this make a mockery of the proposed ban? Or is there some law in the States which stops people from seeking medical treatment wherever they like?

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by Gav

So they ban it in some states but others. What happens when the abortion seeker crosses borders, has the abortion and then goes home. Doesn't this make a mockery of the proposed ban? Or is there some law in the States which stops people from seeking medical treatment wherever they like?

Right now, in the US, the Supreme Court has held you cannot ban abortion. Nebraska's law (which I've only read newspaper accounts about) appears to violate Supreme Court precedent and is widely believed to have been passed to provide the new Supreme Court with a "test case." Why, when even with Roberts and Alito, there are still 5 strong votes to uphold Roe, escapes me.

Assuming Roe were overturned--I would assume one of the first laws sought by abortion foes would be a federal law criminalizing crossing state lines in order to get an abortion.

--Philistine

[Gav]

So a woman crosses state borders, gets an abortion, returns home and is arrested (presumably immediately). Then what? A spell in prison? How is that a good resolution? Surely a woman like this needs counselling and support - not to be treated as a criminal? I am failing to see a good outcome out of a law like this.

[keith]

Originally Posted by Gav

I am failing to see a good outcome out of a law like this.

this is simply because you are ignoring the benefit to their immortal souls.

[Gav]

Originally Posted by keith

this is simply because you are ignoring the benefit to their immortal souls.

Ah yes I must have missed that bit.