A day after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the federal ban on partial-birth abortion, pro-abortion legislators introduced the Freedom of Choice Act, a bill to codify Roe v. Wade, the ruling that brought about abortion on demand.
It appears that Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., knew how the decision would go and had the legislation written and waiting. Nadler said it would "bar government, at any level, from interfering with a woman's fundamental right to choose to terminate a pregnancy."
The bill is considered a long shot. Similar legislation was introduced in the past several Congresses, but each attempt failed.
Carrie Gordon Earll, senior bioethics analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the measure would repeal all state and federal abortion restrictions.
"It's a very radical piece of legislation," she said. "It attempts to take back, if you will, all of the pro-life ground that has been gained in the last 30-plus years."
Abortion activists have typically counted on the courts to back them up, but Earll said Wednesday's ruling proves that's no longer a sure thing.
"This is their way of saying, 'We don't think the so-called right to abortion is safe in the U.S. Supreme Court, so we are going to take this to Congress,' " she said. " ' We are going to put this back in the legislative arena.' "
Alliance Defense Fund attorney Casey Mattox said the ploy could backfire.
"There's even a question mark whether a national law that protects abortion rights in this sense would be constitutional," he told Family News in Focus. "The argument for the Choice Act would be, 'Well it protects constitutional rights.' And one would then need to look at, 'Was Roe v. Wade rightly decided? Is there a constitutional right to abortion?'"
