Abortion Advocates Blast Supreme Court’s Partial-Birth Abortion Ruling 
Email this article
Printer friendly page
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
April 18, 2007
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — Abortion advocates sued to overturn the Congressional ban on partial-birth abortions President Bush signed into law. They had hoped the high court would overturn the ban on the three-day-long abortion procedure as it did a Nebraska ban in 2000 and are irate that it upheld the law.
Calling the decision a "dark day," for the fight to keep abortion legal, Planned Parenthood president Cecille Richards sent out a fundraising email to the abortion business’ supporters just hours after the decision.
"Your immediate help is essential as Planned Parenthood responds to the disastrous U.S. Supreme Court decision," Richards wrote in the financial plea.
She claimed the high court "turned its back on more than 30 years of Supreme Court decisions" promoting abortion, despite numerous decisions uphold pro-life laws since the Roe ruling in 1973.
"There is no way we will let this stand," Richards warned, adding that "Planned Parenthood lawyers and medical experts are carefully studying the justices’ opinions, searching out ways to ensure" that it can continue doing hundreds of thousands of abortions despite "this reckless ruling."
Nancy Keenan, the head of NARAL, was upset by the ruling as well.
"This case is about more than abortion. This decision means the Court is willing to partner with the Bush administration and uphold laws that interfere with personal decisions that should be left up to a woman and her family," she said.
The ruling also upset pro-abortion members of the high court and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a former attorney for the pro-abortion ACLU, called the decision "alarming" and read parts of her dissent form the bench.
Most times, justices do not read their dissents.
"In candor, the Partial Birth Abortion Act and the court’s defense of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court — and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women’s lives," she said.
