BISMARCK, N.D. - As oil-rich North Dakota moves toward outlawing most abortions, it's in a better position than most states for what could be a long and costly court battle over its restrictions.
Lawmakers on Friday sent the Republican governor two anti-abortion bills, one banning the procedure as early as six weeks into a pregnancy and another prohibiting women from having the procedure because a fetus has a genetic defect, such as Down syndrome. They would be the most restrictive abortion laws in the U.S
Abortion-rights activists have promised a legal battle over the measures if they become law. But supporters of the bills say their goal is to challenge the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion up until a fetus is considered viable, usually at 22 to 24 weeks
Rep. Bette Grande, a Republican from Fargo who introduced the measures told lawmakers earlier in the week that fears about a legal challenge shouldn't prevent them from strengthening North Dakota's already strict abortion laws.
Gov. Jack Dalrymple hasn't said anything to indicate he would veto the measures, and the bills have enough support in each chamber for the Republican-controlled Legislature to override him. The Senate overwhelmingly approved the bills Friday, and the House passed them last month. The votes were largely on party lines, with Republicans supporting the measures and Democrats opposing them.
The American Civil Liberties Union called the measures "extreme" and noted that many women don't realize they are pregnant until after six weeks. "In America, no woman, no matter where she lives, should be denied the ability to make this deeply personal decision," ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said in a statement.
North Dakota is one of several states with Republican-controlled Legislatures and GOP governors that is looking at abortion restrictions. Arkansas passed a 12-week ban earlier this month that prohibits most abortions when a fetal heartbeat can be detected using an abdominal ultrasound. That ban is scheduled to take effect 90 days after the Arkansas Legislature adjourns.
North Dakota's measure doesn't specify how a fetal heartbeat would be detected. Doctors performing an abortion after a heartbeat is detected could face a felony charge punishable by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Women having an abortion would not face charges.
The genetic abnormalities bill also bans abortion based on gender selection. Pennsylvania, Arizona and Oklahoma already have such laws, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion restrictions across the U.S. North Dakota would be the first state to ban abortions based on a genetic defect, according to the institute.
Sen. Margaret Sitte, a Republican from Bismarck, said the bill is meant to ban the destruction of life based on "an arbitrary society standard of being good enough." Some test results pointing to abnormalities are incorrect, she said, and doctors can perform surgeries even before a baby is born to correct some genetic conditions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think if a woman is pregnant, and she want's to spend her own money on an abortion. Then she should be able to.
ReplyDeleteMatthew Hodek
Per. 3
I say its about time they pass a law about abortion, why because if they don't want the baby they can still have it and give it up for adoption at lease they won't be killing their own child. And they won't have any bad thoughts when they get older, they won't regret it.
ReplyDeletehaley armstrong
per.3
I think that it is a good thing that North Dakota is passing a bill to prevent abortions for most women. If they have the baby they can give it up for adoption. I think that it is wrong to kill a baby with Down Syndrome.
ReplyDeleteAshleyotto p2
I agree with Matthew on that, but I don't really care about abortions. It's their choice.
ReplyDeleteP.Kevin B.
P:7
rely men don't care if their baby lives or dies, what if was your baby, would you let your girl frend kill it.
DeleteI am so glad they are passing these stricter abortion laws. It is so mind-boggling to me that Americans can rant about the evils of war and murder, and even about the killing of trees- trees, which are not sentient, and yet they think it's all right to kill an innocent baby just because they don't want it. "A person's a person, no matter how small" -Dr. Seuss
ReplyDeleteThere are so many alternatives to killing your fetus. Really, abortion is such a selfish thing to do. The only way I could ever see it as justifiable is if the mother's life was in danger. In other cases, it is just cowardly. Not being able to own up to your own mistakes, and ending someone's life because of it, is lower than low.
Abby Johnson
Period 3
Whoa, Strong words. But I completely agree, and I love that you used a Dr. Seuss quote. It was their mistake. Find a way to fix it! Threatening court battle is a great way to enforce the laws they put out there.
DeleteAndrea Warkentin: Period 2
Abortion are wrong well to me it is. Why would someone want to kill a little baby? I really don't like this at all.
ReplyDeleteBryanna Bue p7
I agree with this. I think their should not be any abortion. Only if a girl gets sexual attack by a guy. Then she should use it.
ReplyDeleteTappe p7th
LAST COMMENT!
ReplyDeleteI think she shouldn't abort the baby even if she is "sexually attacked" by a guy, as you so eloquently put it, Ryan. Yes, she is a victim, but that doesn't mean she should make her baby a victim. It starts a cycle of victimization. In that situation, it would be best for her, I think, to put the baby up for adoption.
ReplyDeleteAbby Johnson period 3