If there is a common denominator to much of the coverage of the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision to uphold the Partial-Birth Abortion Act, it is that there were so many smooth lies and clever disinformation that whatever truth there was in the account can easily get lost in the shuffle. It is important--and not only for obvious reasons--to separate the wheat from the chaff. What is gotten right can prove how dishonest the critics of the ban have been.

I have in mind, as one example, a story in the the New York Times headlined, "Anger and Alternatives on Abortion," written by Gina Kolata. I won't bother to discuss the errors.

In Kolata's story, she writes that the American Medical Association did not issue a statement after the Gonzales v. Carhart decision. The AMA's "policy, which abbreviates dilation and extraction [partial-birth abortion] as D & X, states:  According to the scientific literature, there does not appear to be any identified situation in which intact D & X is the only appropriate procedure to induce abortion, and ethical concerns have been raised about intact D & X. The A.M.A. recommends that the procedure not be used unless alternative procedures pose materially greater risk to the woman.'"

There's no evidence in the story that there are such situations. To take just one example, Kolata quotes Dr. Frederic D. Frigoletto, vice chairman of obstetrics and gynecology at Massachusetts General, and past president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

He "called for a different kind of effort among people who want to preserve women's right to abortion. 'We are not in favor of this act, but now that it is here, we should prevent further intrusions' by legislatures into medical practice, Dr. Frigoletto said, 'rather than spending a lot of energy saying things that are not very accurate about the impact.'"

Use of partial-birth abortions, he implied, was a matter of preference.

"Just like any surgical procedure, there are variations, and some surgeons feel more comfortable with one procedure than another, based on training and experience," Frigoletto said.

Tomorrow, we'll examine how Justice Kennedy responded to Justice Ginsburg insistence that the law imposes an "undue burden" on a woman's "right" to an abortion.