Va. ‘partial-birth’ abortion ban upheld

» 7 Comments | Post a Comment

A federal appeals court in Richmond voted yesterday to uphold Virginia's 2003 law that bans a type of late-term abortion, which means the case might be headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.

The 6-5 ruling reversed two 2-1 rulings by a panel of the appeals court. The panel had struck down the Virginia law, which prohibits what opponents of the procedure call "partial-birth abortion."

University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias said the "very close opinion on a highly controversial, important issue" will likely be appealed and reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

State Attorney General Bill Mims said the Virginia ban passed both houses of the General Assembly with bipartisan support.

"While we anticipate that the U.S. Supreme Court may be asked to review the decision, I am confident that the Supreme Court ultimately will uphold the law."

Mims noted that Attorneys General Jerry W. Kilgore, Judith Jagdmann, Bob McDonnell and he have defended the statute over the past six years. McDonnell, now the Republican nominee for governor, asked the full court last year to reconsider the case. He issued a statement yesterday praising the decision.

Victoria Cobb, president of the anti-abortion Family Foundation, said the Virginia law substantially follows the federal law that has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court so "we were confident that the full 4th Circuit would uphold this common sense, widely supported ban."

Stephanie Toti, who argued the case before the full 4th Circuit on behalf of the Center for Reproductive Rights, a supporter of abortion rights, said she had just received the opinion. "We are still evaluating our options with regard to the next step," she said.

Courtney Jones, manager of grassroots organizing for the Virginia League of Planned Parenthood, said the league was not a party to the suit but is disappointed at the ruling.

"We do believe that the court's opinion will place an undue burden on women," she added. "We would hope the court would stop playing politics with women's health."

Olivia Gans, president of the Virginia Society for Human Life, hailed the ruling, saying: "There is no doubt that the Virginia's partial birth abortion infanticide ban will save the lives of hundreds of Virginia babies from this horrible and violent procedure."

According to the arguments before the court in October, the most common abortion method during the second trimester is the dilation and evacuation procedure, or D&E, in which the fetus is destroyed in the uterus. The Virginia ban bars "intact D&Es," in which an intact fetus is destroyed after it is expelled or partially expelled.

William E. Thro, a former Virginia solicitor general who argued the case for the state in October, told the court that the Virginia act is constitutional. He said it prohibits the same thing as a federal law that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld.

But one of the appeals court judges, M. Blane Michael, said in October that under the Virginia law a physician who intends to perform a regular D&E could face prosecution if it accidentally turned into an "intact D&E."

"He faces a credible threat of prosecution every day he performs one of these," Michael said then.

But Thro said the Virginia law did not apply to accidental intact D&Es.



Contact Tyler Whitley at (804) 649-6780 or .

Advertisement

 
View More: bill mims,abortion,4th circuit,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by Opinion8d on June 26, 2009 at 9:57 pm

Roe v. Wade guarantes an individual’s right to medical privacy. It is not about abortion. I do not agree with abortion as a general method of birth control, especially repeatedly. However, there are conditions that the baby or mother could have or obtain during the pregnancy leaving either little or no hope for the baby or mother who may have other children to care for. Sometimes these conditions are not detected until later in pregnancy. The right to choose should be protected.

So, it is my opinion that a bunch of male ‘suits’ in Washington have no business dictating to a woman what decisions she must make regarding healthcare.

Let’s leave it Pro-Choice so that people in real situations can choose to end a terminal pregnancy or so that people in non-terminal situations can choose to do the same and leave the judgement in all cases between the mothers and their Maker/God, etc.

Flag Comment Posted by datony on June 26, 2009 at 3:54 am

i am sure that there will be many differences of opinion regarding this particular article,but i think that ‘Dave’( i cant believe i am agreeing with him lol) made an excellent point: i would rather take my chances on voters than those in the courts anyday…maybe judges need to be elected officials that are voted in by the people instead of their peers…as far as the abortion issue itself, i strongly believe that it is a woman’s right,but every situation has different circumstances….i do have a problem with officials making decisions for people without any regard to the invidiuals choice.

Flag Comment Posted by Blueyonder on June 25, 2009 at 11:54 am

“We do believe that the court’s opinion will place an undue burden on women,“
Undue burden? What? I am totally against abortion but if after 6 months, a women can not figure it out, then the burden is being placed on oneself not from the court.

Flag Comment Posted by Dave on June 25, 2009 at 10:06 am

Hitler and Stalin also made appeals to prevention of the ‘tyranny of the majority’. I’ll take my chances on voters over courts and government any day.

Flag Comment Posted by TheNorm on June 25, 2009 at 9:40 am

It’s called a system of “checks and balances” to prevent the tyranny of the majority.  As much as people like to quote our “founders” like Thomas Jefferson on this, they like to disappear people like John Adams.

Flag Comment Posted by Dave on June 25, 2009 at 9:36 am

This is not a matter to be decided by courts. ‘Choice’ seldom wins in a referendum, and it is undemocratic to resort to court decisions to usurp the power of the people. What’s the point of elections and referendums if they can be overturned by unelected elites?

Flag Comment Posted by 123456 on June 25, 2009 at 8:56 am

I am absolutely pro choice when it comes to abortions however I hope that this type of abortion is never allowed. I think only in a case where a mothers life is at risk should this type of abortion be performed.  I think if a woman becomes pregnant, she should know whether or not she wants to have the baby. It is cruel and irresponsible to wait so long into a pregnancy to decide you dont want it.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement