USA TODAY – April 19, 2007

Both sides of debate predict more procedure restrictions
By Charisse Jones and Joan Biskupic, USA TODAY

Ilene Jaroslaw, a New York lawyer, became one face of the national abortion debate after she went public last fall about her decision to end a pregnancy.

In 2003, she learned that the fetus she was carrying had a fatal spinal cord and brain defect. Already the mother of two, she wanted another child, and her physician opted for a procedure that would do little damage to her uterus.

On Wednesday, she learned that a nationwide ban on that procedure, deemed "partial-birth abortion" by its critics, had been upheld by the Supreme Court.

"It was like I was kicked in the stomach," she said. "Its decision will not limit how many abortions are done, but it tells doctors what they can and cannot do in the operating room."

Both abortion rights advocates and opponents predicted that the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling would spur states to impose further restrictions on abortion and signal that the high court one day may overturn its 1973 decision that made abortion legal nationwide.

"Roe v. Wade is in jeopardy," said Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the Washington D.C.-based National Women's Law Center. Wednesday's ruling "is a watershed decision both because it marks the first time we've seen such a major attack succeed on Roe v. Wade and also because it directly contravenes Supreme Court rulings of just a few years ago, and therefore gives a green light to opponents of women's rights to push the envelope."

Roberta Combs, president of the Christian Coalition of America, also called the decision historic — but commended the justices. "It is just a matter of time before the infamous Roe. v. Wade decision in 1973 will also be struck down by the court," she said.

Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, said the nation is still a long way from overturning Roe. v. Wade, but the decision was "a significant step in the right direction."

The court's ruling upheld a ban that does not allow an exception for the woman's health, a judicial shift that critics said showed politics taking precedence over a woman's well-being. Abortion rights advocates voiced concerns that state lawmakers will be emboldened to ban other abortion procedures.

"There's no doubt legislatures around the country who oppose abortion will be passing more and more restrictions as a result of this ruling," said Eve Gartner, senior staff attorney for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Some abortion rights opponents and advocates said the court's decision was a harbinger of decisions to come from the court that has become more conservative through President Bush's nomination of Justice Samuel Alito.

"Bush used his allies' control in Congress to push through anti-abortion legislation, and he used their power to confirm anti-abortion justices to the Supreme Court," said Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women. But Johnson noted that Democratic opponents of the 2003 ban are now part of the majority in the House and Senate.

"The people who fought this law every step of the way are now in a position to attack it," Johnson said. "There may be an attempt to repeal the law upheld today though I don't expect that effort to succeed."