 |
 |
| AP Photo Archive |
|
| Demonstrators hold pro-choice signs as an opposing group holds up anti-abortion signs during a rally to protest South Dakota’s new anti-abortion law outside the Federal building in downtown Sioux Falls, S.D., March 9. |
|
Gov. Mike Rounds signed a bill March 6, prohibiting abortions in South Dakota, except in cases where the procedure is necessary to save the mother’s life.
House bill HB1215, dubbed “The Women’s Health and Human Life Protection Act,” would make performing an abortion a class five felony, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.
About 800 abortions are carried out each year in South Dakota, according to www.plannedparenthood.org.
The bill, set to go into effect July 1, is a direct challenge to the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Roe v. Wade case, which legalized abortion in the United States. As such, the bill will likely be delayed by lawsuits.
“We intend to challenge this law in order to protect the women and families of South Dakota,” said Kate Looby, state director of Planned Parenthood, South Dakota’s sole abortion provider.
Another pro-choice group, the American Civil Liberties Union, also intends to join in the fight.
“The state will lose, and the Supreme Court may not even hear it,” said Jennifer Ring, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of the Dakotas. “The state is going to have to pick up the costs at every level.”
In anticipation of lawsuits, the bill provides for the creation of an account specifically earmarked for donations to help pay for the legal costs of the bill. Said Rep. Roger Hunt, the primary sponsor of the bill, an anonymous donation of $1 million has been pledged.
Pro-life groups argue that the recent appointment of justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court may be the deciding element in banning abortion nationwide.
Rounds, a pro-life Catholic, said he doesn’t necessarily believe a direct approach will work to dissolve Roe v. Wade, but would rather take steps to chip away at it gradually.
“Personally, I think this court will be more interested in looking at different aspects of Roe v. Wade rather than the direct frontal assault, but we’ll never know unless someone tries,” Rounds said at a news conference March 6.
While the bill makes no provisions for rape and incest, advocates maintain that the law provides an element of choice, in that it does not affect the legality of the “morning after” emergency contraceptive pill.
Mississippi is considering a similar measure. The bill, which passed the House Public Health Committee on March 7, would also allow abortion only to save a woman’s life. Gov. Haley Barbour said to reporters March 1, he would probably sign it into law.
Locally the bill has caught the eyes of some members of the Idaho Senate.
District 34 Sen. Brent Hill of Rexburg said Idaho may consider similar legislation sometime in the future.
“Here in Idaho, we are always looking for ways to prohibit abortions, except to save the life of the mother, and I will continue to support such efforts,” Hill said.
