It seems from article below which is on the South Dakota Right to Life website that they opposed the bill not only because of timing but also because the bill contained a health exception that allows the abortionist to perform abortions throughout the pregnancy at his discretion.
Any one involved with pro-life legislation long enough knows that a health except like this is a killer amendment that renders the law useless. Which is why PRO-ABORTION law makers always try to add "health exceptions" to pro-life bills.
Pro-abortion lawmakers in the US Senate tried to add a "health" exception to the Partial-Birth Abortion ban but every pro-life lawmaker and organization opposed the exception because it would have make the ban useless.
http://www.sdrl.org/legislative_priorities/1191%20VETO%20OVERIDE.htm 1191 VETO OVERIDE
If 1191 should pass, besides a challenge in state court, 3 things can happen, they are --
1. Challenged in district court. We lose and appeal to circuit court.
We lose and appeal to Supreme Court and Cert. is denied.
Results: Law is dead, NO lives are saved, state has spent $1,000,000 of which $500,000 will go to help the advocates of abortion in their fight against any good pro life bill that we may bring when the opportunity for success is there.
2. Challenged in district court. We lose and appeal to circuit court.
We lose and appeal to Supreme Court and Cert. is accepted.
We argue in court and lose.
Results: Law is dead, NO lives are saved, state has spent $1,000,000 + of which more than $500,000 will go to help the advocates of abortion in their fight against any good pro life bill that we may bring when the opportunity for success is there, but the opportunity will be set back for at least 10-15 years and probably more because of the principle of stare decisis which means that the law is settled and there is no reason to revisit it.
3. Challenged in district court. We lose and appeal to circuit court.
We lose and appeal to Supreme Court and Cert. is accepted.
We argue in court and win.
Results: We have just enacted the most liberal abortion law for SD in the history of the state. The health exception in 1191 allows abortion at any time from conception to birth. All discretion is left to the abortionist, including partial birth abortion. It is solely his decision.
Of the three possibilities for 1191 the first is by far the most likely. The second is less likely but the consequences are far worse, we have not only not saved babies, as some claim 1191 will do, but have precluded doing anything substantive as to preventing abortions for at least a decade, probably another thirty years. If the third possibility should happen, I wonder if the proponents are willing to accept the consequences?
Probably the gravest consequence of all in passing 1191 is that we have deluded the vast majority of South Dakotans who understand what abortion really is, and have worked long and hard to eliminate, into believing we have done something to advance the cause, when in fact we have done the opposite.