Posted on 08/27/2004 2:00:22 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
A federal judge ruled today the federal partial-birth abortion ban is unconstitutional, striking a blow to those determined to outlaw the grisly procedure.
The ruling of U.S. District Judge Richard Casey of Manhattan mirrors one in June in a separate case in San Francisco. One more challenge to the ban, which was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush, is still pending, in Nebraska.
In his ruling, Casey called partial-birth abortion a "gruesome procedure" but claimed the ban conflicts with a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in 2000 upholding the practice. That decision in the Steinberg v. Carhart case said a "health of the mother" exception must be a part of any abortion ban.
"While Congress and lower courts may disagree with the Supreme Court's constitutional decision, that does not free them from their constitutional duty to obey the Supreme Court's rulings," Casey said.
The case was brought against the federal government by the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Abortion Federation.
Casey admitted in his ruling: "The Court finds that the testimony at trial and before Congress establishes that D&X [partial-birth abortion] is a gruesome, brutal, barbaric, and uncivilized medical procedure."
An abortion provider in the Manhattan trial testified an unborn child often is dismembered during the procedure and does not immediately die after limbs are pulled off.
The baby remains alive until the head is crushed, he testified in the case.
Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice has been a part of all three cases, supporting the Department of Justice by presenting information about the pain of the unborn baby.
"The truth about this barbaric procedure is finally coming to light – a horrific and repulsive procedure that clearly underscores the need for this ban on partial-birth abortion," Sekulow said in April. "The testimony of the abortion providers is not only revealing gruesome details about a procedure that amounts to infanticide, but is setting the stage for the Department of Justice to prove that this procedure is never medically necessary."
Sekulow stated today he was disappointed in the ruling and predicts the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately will rule on the issue.
"The court missed an important opportunity to step-in and protect life by eliminating the bridge between abortion and infanticide," Sekulow said. "While the decision is disappointing, it's important to realize that this ruling represents only the beginning of a lengthy legal process that will end at the Supreme Court of the United States.
"We remain committed to working for the protection of human life and outlawing the barbaric procedure known as partial-birth abortion. It is unfortunate that the court failed to uphold the constitutionality of the abortion ban and felt that it was bound by the Supreme Court's decision in the Nebraska case, but we remain hopeful that the ban ultimately will clear the constitutional hurdles."
Bush signed the bill in November, saying, "A terrible form of violence has been directed against children who are inches from birth while the law looked the other way."
The president's Democratic opponent, Sen. John Kerry, voted against the ban six times.
I have been offline for several days because my sister had a seizure and is in the hospital.
Sorry to hear about your sister -- prayers on their way. Keep us posted.
That happened on Saturday night. This is the first I have been online since then. Hopefully she will be out of the hospital tomorrow
Amen.
An abortion provider in the Manhattan trial testified an unborn child often is dismembered during the procedure and does not immediately die after limbs are pulled off.
The baby remains alive until the head is crushed, he testified in the case.
I don't know about you, but if I were God, I'd have some pretty nasty plans for a society who made this practice available for convenience.
Prayers rising
Obviously the leftists think it benefits society.... sure.
Thank you.
If she was still 'in the woods' I wouldn't be online right now.
That's encouraging, amigo.
We need a good DA to just try one of these death providers for murder. Make them explain at what point during the birth they think "it" passes over having the qualities of, say a loose tooth, and a person.
So does Scott Peterson get off on one of the 2 counts of murder he is charged with ??
Always. My fiance caretakes once in a while for a 30-yr dev. diabled women who is also epileptic. I was on hand for one of her major seizures, it was very frightening. Please keep us updated. God Bless
You blacked robed dictators are not unlike the men who considered human beings as property--to be dealt and traded at the whim and pleasure of the owner. "Who are we to tell a man what to do with his possessions?" is a question they might ask, all the while ignoring the fundamental truth: the humanity of another being.
Hopefully she will not continue having them.
BTTT
Bears repeating...
That would be the logical conclusion of this absurd decision.
Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.