Abortion opponents going for 'fresh angle'

WASHINGTON — Samuel Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court put a national spotlight on abortion and on whether the conservative federal judge might be part of a legal avalanche that eventually topples Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that made abortion legal nationwide.

For now, however, most of the debates over abortion in state legislatures stem from abortion opponents' continuing push to emphasize the interests of fetuses and to create more hurdles for women seeking abortions.

It's a strategy that has led to a range of restrictions on abortion and to proposals in 21 states aimed at requiring doctors to tell women seeking an abortion that their fetuses might feel pain during the procedure.

"It's humanizing the unborn," says Daniel McConchie, vice president of Americans United for Life, a group that opposes abortion rights. He says "fetal pain" bills are "a fresh angle on (what) a lot of people think is an old topic. It puts a new face on an issue."

Officials in Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, South Dakota and Tennessee are considering bills that would criminalize abortion and challenge Roe v. Wade directly, but many abortion opponents have been reluctant to back such bills aggressively — even though they represent the groups' ultimate goal.

That's because abortion opponents are hoping for more turnover on the high court, which could make it more conservative — and presumably friendlier to arguments from those against abortion.

Alito, whose writings as a lower-court judge suggest he might take a limited view of abortion rights, replaced Sandra Day O'Connor, one of six justices on the nine-member court who supported such rights.

If Alito turns out to oppose abortion rights, a majority of the court still would support Roe. That makes groups such as Americans United for Life reluctant to support abortion bans that could lead to a test case at the Supreme Court.

McConchie notes that anti-abortion activists were demoralized in 1992, when the justices strongly affirmed Roe v.. Wade.

Denise Mackura of Ohio Right to Life says her group has not endorsed a bill to ban abortion and instead is pushing for more restrictions.

"In any legislative attempt, if you fail, that sends another message," Mackura says.

The sponsor of the Ohio bill, state Rep. Tom Brinkman, says, "They might be right that this is not the time at the Supreme Court. But my feeling is, let's move straight ahead and start this lengthy process. We'll see what kind of support we get in the end."

Abortion foes also acknowledge they face another obstacle: Polls consistently have shown that about two-thirds of Americans believe that abortion should be legal.

"You can change legislatures, you can change justices," says Carolyn Garcia, a Georgia activist and abortion opponent. "But if you don't change the hearts of regular people ... women will keep choosing abortion."

Elizabeth Nash follows state legislation for the Guttmacher Institute, a non-profit group that tracks women's health issues and supports abortion rights. She says that "the social conservatives who want to restrict abortion had a bigger impact in the states last year than they had in the past several years. And from the legislation that was introduced in January, it appears there will be a lot of state activity on abortion restrictions in 2006."

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court soon will decide whether to hear the White House's appeal of a lower- court ruling against the federal ban on a procedure critics call "partial birth" abortion.

The lower court said the ban was unconstitutional because it lacked an exception for when the procedure is needed to preserve a mother's health.

Mackura says "it's a new world with Alito" and another Bush appointee, Chief Justice John Roberts, on the Supreme Court.

"Not because they will overturn Roe v. Wade," she says, "but it looks as if they would be open to our arguments."

That prospect alarms abortion rights supporters.

Kellie Copeland, director of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio, says, "I think reproductive rights are in jeopardy now more than ever."

<< USA Today -- 2/8/06 >>

Send this page to a friend!