Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (Public Law 108-105, HR 760, S 3)[1] (or "PBA Ban") is a United States law prohibiting intact dilation and extraction, which some refer to by the non-medical term partial-birth abortion. Any person or physician who knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. The bill passed both chambers of Congress: 281-142 in the House of Representatives on October 2, 2003, and 64-34 in the Senate on October 21, 2003, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on November 5, 2003. The law has been challenged in court (see Gonzales v. Carhart).
This statute deals with pre-viability second trimester abortions,[2] whereas most abortions occur during the first trimester. Although public opinion views second trimester abortion as something that should generally be illegal, this statute is ostensibly directed only at a method of abortion, rather than at preventing any woman from obtaining an abortion.[3] Objections to this statute are primarily related to the health of a woman seeking abortion; a relatively small number of second trimester abortions are due to health concerns.
Contents |
[edit] Findings
| “ | The Congress finds and declares the following:
(1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion--an abortion in which a physician delivers an unborn child's body until only the head remains inside the womb, punctures the back of the child's skull with a sharp instrument, and sucks the child's brains out before completing delivery of the dead infant--is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited. (2) Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at least 27 States banned the procedure as did the United States Congress which voted to ban the procedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses. |
” |
[edit] Life of the mother
Despite its finding that "partial-birth abortion ... is ... unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother", the statute includes the following provision:
| “ | This subsection [imposing penalties] does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. | ” |
This may have been a precaution in case the courts reject Congress's findings of fact. As Hadley Arkes commented, in an editorial in the National Review, "That provision went even further than the law was obliged to go, for as the American Medical Association testified during the hearings, a partial-birth abortion bore no relevance to any measure needed to advance the health of any woman."[4]
[edit] Partial-birth abortion defined by law
| “ | An abortion in which the person performing the abortion, deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus. | ” |
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) does not recognize the term "partial birth abortion". [5] The American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), a special interest group within the ACOG, disagrees with the ACOG position on "partial birth abortion."[6]
[edit] House Vote Results
In the House, the bill was supported by 218 Republicans and 63 Democrats. It was opposed by 4 Republicans, 137 Democrats, and 1 independent. Twelve members were absent, 7 Republicans and 5 Democrats. The bill was then sent to the Senate for the final vote. Roll Call No. 530, October 2, 2003.
In favor: 281
Against: 142
Did not vote: 12
|
|
|
[edit] Senate Vote Results
In the Senate the bill was supported by 47 Republicans and 17 Democrats. It was opposed by 3 Republicans, 30 Democrats, and 1 independent. Two Senators were absent, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tx.), a supporter of the bill, and Sen. John Edwards (D-NC), an opponent of the bill. The bill was then sent to President George W. Bush for his signature to become law. Roll Call No. 402, October 21, 2003.
In favor: 64
Against: 34
|
|
|
Did not vote: 2
- John Edwards (D-NC)
- Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)
[edit] Status of the Law
The law has been challenged in court. For a comprehensive history of the case, see Gonzales v. Carhart.
June 1, 2004
Federal District Judge Phyllis Hamilton of California struck it down on June 1, 2004 on three grounds (2):
- Because it places an 'undue burden' (i.e., "a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.") on women seeking abortion.
- Because its language is unconstitutionally vague.
- Because it lacks constitutionally-required provisions to preserve women's health.
A nationwide injunction was withheld while waiting for similar decisions from the Federal Courts of Nebraska and New York.
(Planned Parenthood v. Ashcroft)[1]
August 26, 2004
New York District Judge Richard C. Casey found the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act unconstitutional. He ruled that the act must contain exceptions to protect a woman's health.
September 8, 2004
U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf, a George H.W. Bush appointee, in Nebraska concluded that, "the overwhelming weight of the trial evidence proves that the banned procedure is safe and medically necessary in order to preserve the health of women under certain circumstances. In the absence of an exception for the health of a woman, banning the procedure constitutes a significant health hazard to women."
"The court does not determine whether the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 is constitutional or unconstitutional when the fetus is indisputably viable," Kopf wrote.
(Carhart v. Ashcroft)
July 8, 2005
Three judges of the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis unanimously agreed, "Because the Act does not contain a health exception, it is unconstitutional."
(Carhart v. Gonzales)[3]
January 31, 2006
Two federal appeals courts on opposite sides of the country declared the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act unconstitutional Tuesday, January 31, 2006, saying the measure lacks an exception for cases in which a woman's health is at stake.
The first ruling came from a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Hours later, a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan issued a similar decision in a 2-1 ruling.
February 21, 2006
The Supreme Court agreed to review the lower court ruling in Gonzales v. Carhart. For further information on the political and legal issues surrounding the bill, see Abortion in the United States.
[edit] Footnotes
- ^ Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate (HTML); * same, from the U.S. Government Printing Office (PDF)
- ^ See Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000), in which the Court stated: "In sum, using this law some present prosecutors and future Attorneys General may choose to pursue physicians who use D&E procedures, the most commonly used method for performing previability second trimester abortions."
- ^ See Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000), in which Justice Ginsburg stated in concurrence: "As the Court observes, this law does not save any fetus from destruction, for it targets only 'a method of performing abortion.'"
- ^ Hadley Arkes, Talking Partial-Birth Abortion, National Review (October 13, 2004).
- ^ American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (October 3, 2003). Statement on So-Called "Partial Birth Abortion" Law. Retrieved January 15, 2007.
- ^ American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Partial Birth Abortion. Retrieved 2007-01-15.
[edit] External links
- ReligiousTolerance.org: D&X Procedure (aka Partial Birth Abortion) - All sides
- The Partial Birth Abortion Ban speech by Congressman Ron Paul
| Abortion law (Part of the abortion series) | ||
|---|---|---|
| History & overview: | Case law, History of abortion law, Laws by country | |
| Types of regulation: | Buffer zones, Conscience clauses, Informed consent, Fetal protection, Parental involvement, Spousal consent | |
