Ever since the SCOTUS nominations we have been hearing the liberals grumble about the anticipated reversal of Roe v Wade.  While I have blogged previously why I do not think a reversal of Roe is imminent, the nay sayers have painted lurid tales of back room abortions and grim visions of young girls braving disgusting conditions to avoid bearing the child of a rapist. 

Ted Kennedy even managed to make abortion a part of the Immigration debate and the English language debate, a hat trick in political terms by lumping 3 separate issues into one.

The truth is they could be right.  I know in the case of late term abortion the public sentiment is strongly opposed to it, as well as in the cases involving parental notification.  That one I can understand.  It seems fairly ignorant that a girl in this state, for example, can get an abortion without permission or notification of her parents, but cannot get her ears pierced without a signed consent and a parent in attendance.

The law banning abortion that was passed in South Dakota back in March is being closely watched, and is obviously considered to be the Abortion Litmus Test of the new court.  Will they uphold the venerable Roe Wade decision?  Or will they lift a finger to stare decisis and overturn it? 

To be fair, Roe Wade is by almost all evaluations a terrible decision, but even the bad has the power of precedent now.  But, also to be fair, stare decisis is also a lousy excuse to keep a law on the books.  To fall back on "stand by that which is decided" is nice, but how many people today would be happy falling back on stare decisis when Dred Scott is considered?  The decision to overturn a ruling is a cautious one, but not without possibility or reversal, or even a feeling of necessity to do so.

So why did I bore you with all that?

Well keeping all that considered, did you know that the Lousiana Legislature has just passed a law banning all abortions, except in the case of the life of the mother?  This includes rape and incest. 

And Governor Blanco, a woman and a democrat has signed it?

The law is a trigger law, that will only go into effect if Roe v Wade is overturned.  Suddenly the pieces fall into place..

Louisiana gov. signs law that would ban abortions

Louisiana Democratic Gov. Kathleen Blanco signed into law a ban on most abortions, which would be triggered if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns its 1973 ruling legalizing the procedure, a spokesman said on Saturday.

The ban would apply to all abortions, even in cases of rape or incest, except when the mother’s life is threatened. It is similar to a South Dakota law that has become the latest focus of the abortion battle.

The South Dakota law was enacted partly to invite a court challenge in the hope a more conservative Supreme Court would overturn its Roe v. Wade decision that established a woman’s right to abortion.

The Louisiana ban would take effect if Roe v. Wade is overturned. Medicaid, which provides health benefits for the poor and disabled, requires funding for abortions in cases of rape or incest. Louisiana would allow those exceptions so long as it was required for Medicaid funding.

Seven states have such abortion trigger laws, and Louisiana already had a trigger law, although abortion legislation has been blocked by courts. The new law would mean the ban would happen quicker in the case of a new Supreme Court decision.

Blanco cited "overwhelming" support for the bill in the state Legislature. (emphasis mine)

"The central provision of the bill supports and reflects my personal beliefs," she said in a statement, adding she had hoped for legislation with exceptions for rape and incest.

Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said lawmakers were focused on the wrong thing, especially as the state rebuilds from Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans last August.

"It is hard to believe that by passing this ban they are addressing what is most on the minds of most of the citizens of Louisiana," she told Reuters.

Most U.S. states have some limits on abortion linked to gestation of the fetus and often based on viability, essentially the ability to live outside the womb.

The liberals and feminist who are closely watching the SCOTUS might want to shift their focus a bit.  You see the reversal of Roe will return the laws to the states, and it appears the states have their own laws still in play.  It seems like some of their own base is jumping ship over the right to life, at least in this case.

I have to note that it seems ironic to me  that a Democratic Governor has signed a law banning abortion, and Bush has gone on the record stating he does not believe Rowe will be overturned.

I guess it is easier to blame Bush, but blame Blanco seems a bit more accurate, at least in Louisiana.

We shall see.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS