Great News for Women!

Judge Calls Abortion Ban Unconstitutional

By Marc Kaufman - Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, June 1, 2004; 5:15 PM The long-debated and highly contentious Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act was struck down today by a federal judge in California, who ruled that the bill jeopardized other legal forms of abortion and threatened the health of women ending their pregnancies. In a strongly-worded opinion that accused Congress of misrepresenting many scientific facts regarding the procedure used to abort a fetus late in the pregnancy, U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton concluded that the bill -- approved by wide margins in Congress last year and signed by President Bush -- was unconstitutional. The ruling adopted most of the arguments put forward by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America in finding that the bill was too vague, that it placed an unfair burden on women seeking certain kinds of abortions and that it did not do enough to protect the health of the woman. The partial-birth abortion ban was already on hold because of legal challenges to it, but Hamilton's decision specifically stops the Justice Department from enforcing the law at any of Planned Parenthood's 900 clinics or any of its doctors. Two other challenges to the law are expected to be decided by other federal judges this summer. Justice Department spokeswoman Monica Goodling said in a written statement today that the department is reviewing the ruling. "The Justice Department vigorously litigated this case, as well as the pending cases in Nebraska and New York involving challenges to the law banning partial birth abortions," she said. "The Department will continue to devote all resources necessary to defend this Act of Congress, which President Bush has said 'will end an abhorrent practice and continue to build a culture of life in America.' " Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), a leading opponent of abortion, called the ruling "a travesty," saying Hamilton was deeply biased against the law. "She is a very liberal judge," he said. "This is a classic example of how judges impose their philosophies on judicial proceedings. . . . She clearly had pre-judged this case." Santorum said the two other pending cases, one in New York, will be taken more seriously by the Supreme Court, which is expected to eventually take up the partial-birth issue. The ruling was welcomed as a major victory by Planned Parenthood President Gloria Feldt, who said it "reaffirmed a woman's right to choose, and a doctor's right to practice medicine." She also said the ruling was appropriately critical of Congress. "Because there's a herd mentality on a bill doesn't make it right. The legislation is fatally flawed constitutionally." Felicia Stewart of the University of California, San Francisco's Center for Reproductive Health Research & Policy, said the ruling allows doctors to focus on what's best for their patients. "It's just not reasonable to put a doctor in the position that they have to think, 'Hey I might go to jail if I do this, even if it is the best thing for my patient,' " she said. The term "partial-birth abortion" is not used by doctors, who called the procedure an "intact dilation and extraction." It was developed in the early 1990s, and many abortion providers argue that it can be life-saving for some women and can protect the fertility of others. The procedure, which is generally performed in the second or third trimester and while the fetus is partially delivered, is fairly rare. About 2,000 were done annually before the ban went into effect. Hamilton, reflecting her sometimes highly critical view of the bill, wrote that by referring to the procedure as "infanticide," Congress was being "grossly misleading and inaccurate." She said that Congress was aware that the abortion procedure banned by the bill applied to fetuses that were too young to live outside the mother. Proponents of the bill called the decision unfortunate but expected. "Judge Hamilton's deep personal hostility to the law has been evident throughout the judicial proceedings, and is evident in many passages in her 117-page injunction," Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. "Other district and appellate judges also will be heard from during the months ahead," he said. "It is the U.S. Supreme Court that will ultimately decide whether our elected representatives can ban the practice of mostly delivering a living premature infant and then puncturing her skull. " While the California case was brought by Planned Parenthood, the New York case was brought by the National Abortion Federation, which represents nearly half the nation's abortion providers. The Nebraska case was brought by several abortion doctors. In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Nebraska partial-birth abortion law in a 5-4 vote because it did not allow the procedure even if the doctor believed it was the safest way to preserve a woman's health. The current law also provides no exemption if a woman's health is at stake, with Congress having concluded that it is never a necessary procedure.

Kudos galore to Judge Hamilton! Republican Men: Get the hell out of women's bodies; you have no moral right to make decisions that women can rightfully and more accurately make on their own.