Link: South Dakota bans abortion
On Wednesday, the 22nd of February, the state of South Dakota banned nearly all forms of abortion. The ban rejects exceptions, even in the case of rape or incest. In a statement from the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Senior Staff Attorney Eve Gartner assessed the ban as “an attack on women’s fundamental right of privacy and their ability to make the most intimate and personal choice about when and whether to have a child.”
This scares me. Yeah, it’s a big step backwards. But what scares me is that this could starting point for the long-lasting effects of the Bush administration. Gartner points out that “The U.S. Supreme Court has reaffirmed time and again the constitutional right to make the private choice to have an abortion.” The PPFA has promised to “go to court to ensure women, with their doctors and families, continue to be able to make personal health care decisions — not politicians.” There’s no doubt that a court case was anticipated by the South Dakota lawmakers.
The broader significance of this case, however, has less to do with abortion in South Dakota. That’s big, but this is bigger: it has more to do “testing the waters,” so to speak, of the newly right-dominated Supreme Court. This ban directly defies the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling that made abortion legal (throughout the country). If (or when, rather) this case reaches the Supreme Court we’ll be able to begin to asses the extent of the legacy the Bush administration may or may not leave on America through his choice of Supreme Court nominations.
The timing is suspect. The New York Times notes that “since 2005, bans similar to the bill have been proposed in at least five states.” 2005. Well, what happened in 2005? This: 2005 saw the installment of Bush-nominated Chief Justice John Roberts Jr and Bush-nominated Justice Harriet Ellan Miers to the supreme court. Obviously, conservative states are chomping at the bit to see how far the new installments will go towards achieving the right’s agenda.
