Skip banner
HomeSourcesHow Do I?Site MapHelp
Return To Search FormFOCUS
Search Terms: late term abortion AND ban

Document ListExpanded ListKWICFULL format currently displayed

Previous Document Document 52 of 179. Next Document

Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company  
The New York Times

 View Related Topics 

April 7, 2000, Friday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Page 22; Column 1; Editorial Desk 

LENGTH: 298 words

HEADLINE: 'Partial Birth' Electioneering

BODY:
Neither imminent review of the issue by the Supreme Court nor the promise of yet another presidential veto could deter the House on Wednesday from its familiar ritual of voting to impose a national ban on so-called partial birth abortion. Of course, election year politics explains the rush to yet another showdown. But that hardly justifies lawmakers playing so fast and loose with women's health and constitutional rights, or the fundamental dishonesty of the entire exercise.

This latest version contains some new language defining the procedures covered, but the tinkering still leaves a wide chasm between what its proponents say the ban would do and what the bill actually says. Although described by its proponents as a narrow attack on one late-term abortion procedure, the measure can be read to outlaw procedures commonly used throughout all stages of pregnancy. Like earlier versions, the new House bill contains no exception to protect the health of the pregnant woman and does not use medical terminology to describe the actions it is criminalizing, leaving its terms unconstitutionally vague. Disturbingly, the 287-to-141 vote in the House exceeded the number needed to override a presidential veto by two votes. The Senate's approval of the ban in October fell just two votes short of the number needed to override. That margin is far too close for comfort.

A number of senators who otherwise consider themselves "pro-choice" have voted in the past to support the ban, apparently because they misunderstand its broad impact on abortion rights. They need to reconsider. The broad impact is the reason similar state bans have been struck down by courts, including the Nebraska ban at issue in the case that will be argued in the Supreme Court later this month.  http://www.nytimes.com

LOAD-DATE: April 7, 2000




Previous Document Document 52 of 179. Next Document


FOCUS

Search Terms: late term abortion AND ban
To narrow your search, please enter a word or phrase:
   
About LEXIS-NEXIS® Academic Universe Terms and Conditions Top of Page
Copyright © 2002, LEXIS-NEXIS®, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.