Who Drafted The Partial Birth Abortion Law?

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 is a federal law in the United States that prohibits a specific form of late-term abortion called partial-birth abortion, which is referred to in medical literature as intact dilation and extraction. The law was enacted on November 5, 2003, and its constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007 in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart. The statute defines partial-birth abortion as a procedure where a physician deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until a significant portion of the fetus is outside the mother's body, after which an overt act is performed to kill the fetus. The law imposes fines and/or imprisonment of up to two years for physicians who perform this procedure.

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003

The statute defines "partial-birth abortion" as a procedure in which a physician "deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother". The statute further specifies that this procedure is performed for the purpose of "performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus".

The Act amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit any physician or other individual from knowingly performing a partial-birth abortion, unless it is deemed necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury. A physician who performs a partial-birth abortion may face fines or imprisonment of up to two years.

The US Supreme Court's approval of the ban

The Supreme Court's approval of the ban came in a 5-4 decision on April 18, 2007, in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart. The majority opinion, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, argued that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act clearly defined the banned procedure, addressing the concerns of a previous ruling that struck down a similar Nebraska law in 2000. The majority opinion also stated that the law did not violate the Constitution.

The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, argued that the decision departed from established abortion jurisprudence and that the lack of a health exception in the law jeopardized women's health and placed doctors in a difficult position. Ginsburg also noted that the court's ruling did not prevent a single abortion but merely outlawed a specific procedure.

The Supreme Court's approval was met with mixed reactions. Pro-life, anti-abortion groups applauded the decision, while abortion rights organizations, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Planned Parenthood, and the American Civil Liberties Union, criticized it as a step toward prohibiting abortion. The decision was also criticized by Democratic politicians and medical professionals, who expressed concern about the impact on women's health and abortion access.

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act has been described as a carefully crafted law that took into account previous court rulings. However, critics argue that its broad wording and lack of exceptions for the health of the woman are problematic. The law's impact on abortion providers has been significant, with many adopting the practice of inducing fetal demise before performing late-term abortions to protect themselves from potential accusations.

The legislative history of the Act

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-105) is a United States federal statute that prohibits a specific form of late-term abortion called "partial-birth abortion", referred to in medical literature as "intact dilation and extraction". The law was enacted on November 5, 2003, and its constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007 in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart.

The bill was signed into law by President George W. Bush on November 5, 2003, after passing both chambers of Congress. The law amended the Federal criminal code to prohibit any physician or other individual from knowingly performing a partial-birth abortion, except when necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury.

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act defines "partial-birth abortion" as an abortion in which the person performing the procedure "deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of a breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother". This is done for the purpose of performing an "overt act" that will kill the partially delivered living fetus, such as puncturing the skull or suctioning the brain.

The Act provides for fines or imprisonment of up to two years for physicians who perform partial-birth abortions. It also authorises the father, if married to the mother, and the maternal grandparents of the fetus, if the mother is under 18, to take civil action. Additionally, the Act allows a defendant accused of an offence to seek a hearing before the State Medical Board to determine if the procedure was necessary to save the mother's life.

The medical procedure of partial-birth abortion

Partial-birth abortion is a term used to describe a procedure that involves delivering a substantial portion of a living foetus outside of the mother's body before killing it. This can involve crushing the skull or removing the brain by suction. The procedure is typically used during the middle and final months of pregnancy when dismembering the foetus becomes more difficult due to stronger bones and ligaments.

The partial-birth abortion procedure usually involves two to three days of cervical dilation for the mother, increasing the risk of infection and subsequent preterm births. After this, the doctor can partially deliver the child "intact" before killing it and completing the delivery. This method is distinct from the more commonly used dismemberment method, where the mother's cervix is dilated manually, enough to remove the severed body parts of the foetus.

The American Medical Association (AMA) refers to the procedure as "intact dilation and extraction" (IDX) or "intact dilation and evacuation" (D&X). This involves the following steps:

• Deliberate dilation of the cervix, usually over a sequence of days.
• Instrumental or manual conversion of the foetus to a footling breech position.
• Breech extraction of the body, except for the head.
• Partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the foetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact foetus.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) defines the procedure similarly, with the additional detail that the partial evacuation of the intracranial contents is performed on a living foetus.

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 prohibits this procedure, with the law defining it as:

> "An abortion in which the person performing the abortion, deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living foetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of a breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living foetus; and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living foetus."

The political response to the ban

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 was signed into law by President George W. Bush on November 5, 2003. The Act prohibits a specific abortion procedure, referred to in medical literature as intact dilation and extraction, which is used in the second trimester, from 15 to 26 weeks.

The bill's constitutionality was challenged immediately after it was signed into law, with three different U.S. district courts declaring it unconstitutional due to its omission of an exception for the health of the woman, in addition to her life. The Supreme Court, however, upheld the ban in a 5-4 decision in 2007, stating that the procedure was never medically necessary.

The Supreme Court's decision was met with a range of responses. Many commentators called the decision the most important ruling on abortion in 30 years, with potential Republican candidates approving it. The day after the ruling, two Democrats, Senator Barbara Boxer of California and Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, introduced bills to protect a woman's right to bear a child or end a pregnancy. Several organisations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Center for Reproductive Rights, criticised the court's decision, saying it was a step toward prohibiting abortion. Pro-life and anti-abortion groups, on the other hand, applauded the decision.

Frequently asked questions