Editor's Desk: Roe's Legacy

By Michael F. Flach
Herald Editor
(From the issue of 9/2/04)

The ruling last week by a federal judge in New York that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 is unconstitutional was not surprising to most pro-life supporters.

Federal District Judge Richard Casey ruled that the federal government cannot enforce the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act because the law conflicts with an earlier 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in favor of partial-birth abortion.

President Bush signed the bill on Nov. 5, 2003, saying that in partial-birth abortion "a terrible form of violence has been directed against children who are inches from birth." The Bush Administration currently is defending the law against three separate legal challenges in three different federal courts.

"While this ruling is a disappointment, it is not unexpected given the previous decisions of the Supreme Court," said Sen. Rick Santorum, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference.

Santorum credited Casey "for allowing crucial and factual evidence to be submitted to the record and a healthy discussion of the facts to ensue."

Evidence in the New York Case will ultimately be submitted to the Supreme Court for its reconsideration of a ban on partial-birth abortion, Santorum said. He was pleased that Casey confirmed what Congress established — that partial birth abortion is a "gruesome, brutal, barbaric and uncivilized medical procedure."

Santorum said he stands by his belief that the ban is constitutional. "I know the Department of Justice will continue to work hard to defend this law and preserve and protect human life," he said.

"Today Roe vs. Wade once again made the unthinkable constitutional," said Cathy Cleaver Ruse, spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "Because of Roe, killing a child in the process of being born is called a constitutional right rather than an act of barbarism."

Ruse said the crucial question of medical necessity was never answered at the New York trial. "At every turn where medical records were sought, the medical institutions refused to produce them," she said. "In essence, the abortion doctors said ‘just trust us,’ and no hard evidence was considered."

Ruse applauded the Justice Department for its defense of the ban and encouraged an appeal of the New York ruling. "Partial-birth abortion promises nothing but pain for everyone involved," she said.

Judie Brown, president of American Life League, said her organization never supported the ban because it contains a "life of the mother" exception that effectively neuters the law and therefore will not prevent a single abortion. "However, in ruling that abortions are permissible for various excuses such as the so-called ‘health’ of the mother, court decisions such as this show utter contempt for human beings' lives," Brown said.

"Women and unborn children's health will continue to be at great risk after today's decision by the New York federal district court striking down the federal ban on partial birth abortions," said Nikolas Nikas, general counsel of Americans United for Life (AUL).

"Most Americans do not realize that the Roe Court allowed abortion in the second and third trimesters for the 'life or health' of the mother, and that the Court's expansive definition of 'health' had the effect of making abortion on demand available through all nine months of pregnancy," noted Dorinda Bordlee, AUL’s senior legislative counsel.

For a summary of all U.S. Supreme Court decisions on abortion from 1973-2004, including Roe's companion case of Doe v. Bolton, click on "Court Decisions" at www.aul.org. Full transcripts of the New York trial are available at www.usccb.org/prolife. — M.F.F.

Copyright ©2004 Arlington Catholic Herald.  All rights reserved.