Justices focus on differences in abortion procedures in oral argument

Published: 2006-11-08

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- In two hours of oral arguments Nov. 8 over a federal law banning a procedure known as partial-birth abortion, Supreme Court justices and attorneys considered the intent of Congress in passing the bill, the differences between types of abortion and who gets to decide when those differences matter. The court heard appeals of two lower court rulings that both found the 2003 Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act to be unconstitutional because it does not include provisions allowing its use in some cases to protect a woman's health. From the direction of the questioning, Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens and David Souter seemed to be looking for commonality between the federal law and a similar Nebraska statute that they voted to overturn in 2000. The fifth vote in that 5-4 majority ruling was cast by now-retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Her replacement on the court, Justice Samuel Alito, asked no questions during the two hours devoted to oral arguments.

Copyright (c) 2006 Catholic News Service /U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The CNS news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed, including but not limited to such means as framing or any other digital copying or distribution method, in whole or in part without the prior written authority of Catholic News Service .