Content area
Full Text
I. Introduction
As the manuscripts for the present issue of this journal were being prepared for final publication, the U.S. Senate passed a ban on so-called "late-term abortions." This is the (surprisingly neutral) term generally offered for abortions performed, normally during the third trimester, by "delivering" the lower half of the fetus's body and then collapsing its head so that it can be pulled through the woman's vagina. Under the legislation passed by the Senate, doctors performing such abortions could be fined and imprisoned for up to two years.
Considering that the House and Senate have passed similar bills before which were vetoed by then-president Bill Clinton, there is every reason to believe that, by the time this issue goes to press, the bill will have passed in the U.S. House of Representatives, been signed by the President of the United States, George W. Bush, and become law. Equally undoubtedly, it will soon be challenged in court and possibly, if not probably, struck down because of its lack of a provision for comprehensive health exemptions. Although the procedure may be performed if the life of the pregnant woman is threatened by the pregnancy, the "health" of the woman is not admitted as a legitimate exception. In that sense, the ban may seem moot and hardly worth noting.
But it is not; if the president is able to make more judicial appointments of fellow conservatives, particularly to the Supreme Court, then the ban may well be upheld. And the wording of the bill is vague enough to interfere with women's rights to other kinds of abortions, particularly those performed during the second trimester, a period of pregnancy with ambiguous protection under Roe v. Wade,1 particularly given the bill's assertion of the right of government to intervene between a woman and her doctor. Even if the bill is struck down, the very passage of the ban is highly symbolic-the thin edge of the wedge in conservative Republican efforts to roll back Roe. As Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, the bill's sponsor, put it, "By the actual banning of the procedure itself, I don't think we're stopping any more abortions."2 The Senate's passage of a non-binding resolution reaffirming Senate support of Roe immediately prior to passing the bill...