Supreme Court Upholds President Bush’s Abortion Ban
Decision marks setback for women’s health and privacy, allowing more political interference in personal, private medical decisions Washington, DC – Tara Smith, Executive Director of MARAL Pro-Choice Michigan, issued the following statement in response to today’s Supreme Court decision in the Federal Abortion Ban cases. “Elections matter. An anti-choice Congress and anti-choice president used the political process to push this ban all the way to the Supreme Court. Michigan voters need to elect more policy makers who will stand up for our fundamental values of freedom and privacy—and not attack them with the politics of division. “The same politicians behind this abortion ban also block stem-cell research and interfered in the Terri Schiavo case. Further, the Court, with the addition of Bush’s appointees, has disregarded the medical opinion of leading doctors who oppose the ban. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists—which represents 90 percent of the OB GYNs in this country — says the ban is harmful to women’s health and interferes with medical decision making. “This case is about more than abortion. This decision means the Court has sided with the Bush administration and is willing to make laws that interfere in personal decisions that should be left up to a woman and her family. Indeed the Court’s decision is a setback for all Americans who believe politicians should not make private, personal medical decisions for the rest of us. “As we look toward the 2008 election cycle, we must not forget that incumbent senators voted for Bush’s Federal Abortion Ban. Voters will know that these politicians played a role in undermining the values of freedom and privacy. Fortunately, many pro-choice lawmakers — including current 2008 presidential candidates ¬— stood up to President Bush and opposed the Federal Abortion Ban. We will continue to call on their leadership to fight back against this intrusion into personal, private medical decisions.” Background
The Supreme Court struck down an almost identical state law as unconstitutional in 2000, and every court to hear a challenge to this first-ever federal ban on abortion declared it unconstitutional. Since the Court’s decision in 2000, President Bush appointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court and abortion foes see these appointments as an opportunity to undermine the Roe v. Wade decision. NARAL Pro-Choice America and its affiliate network lobbied strongly against the law and submitted an amicus brief to the Court arguing that the only appropriate remedy for the ban’s constitutional flaws was to bar its enforcement entirely. ###
Contact: Tara Smith, 248-242-0140
| 
