|
||||||
|
|
|
O'Connor's Resignation May Affect NH Case
By Julie Donnelly on Thursday, June 30, 2005.
Washington is reeling from the announcement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's resignation from the Supreme Court. Liberal and conservative groups are bracing for a blistering fight over who will be her successor. The decision could have an impact here in New Hampshire, as the Supreme Court gets ready to hear a controversial abortion case from the Granite state. NHPR Correspondent Julie Donnelly reports from Washington "Justices created a so-called constitutional right to abortion, we have to stop this kind of judicial activism..." Ads like this one - from Concerned Women of America - are likely to be coming to a television set near you. Political groups are swinging into action to try to influence the debate - and senators' votes, on Sandra Day O'Connor's replacement. Tom Fitton from the conservative group Judicial Watch, says abortion opponents are rejoicing over O'Connor's resignation. "she upheld roe vs. wade, she upheld partial birth abortion and from the pro-lifer point of view she was an obstruction to getting the issue of abortion back to the states, where it initially belongs. So now in the face of some new abortion decisions coming along next term, there's going to be a significant pro-life advantage, at least on some of the arguments" And One of those cases is Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. The Supreme court will decide if New Hampshire's law requiring minors to notify their parents before getting an abortion, is constitutional. While 33 other states have similar laws, the vast majority include an exception to protect the health of the pregnant minor. The first circuit court of appeals in Boston struck the law down, saying it was unconstitutional based on a nineteen ninety two precedent holding that states may not place a so-called undue burden on the right to abortion. Sandra Day O'Connor was a pivotal vote in that decision. Louise Melling from the American Civil Liberties Union says that precedent led to other decisions striking down abortion restrictions that don't provide an exception to protect the health of the woman. "the court has been very consistent in it's jurisprudence to say that you can't compromise women's health when you restrict abortion you always have to have an exception so that a physician can take care of a woman . and that question is before the court in this case" Both sides say that with O'Connor still in her seat, they weren't sure which way the case would go. But with her gone, and the likelihood of a more conservative Bush appointee, the scales are tipping towards a decision supporting the parental notification law. But Dawn Touzin from Planned Parenthood in New Hampshire, says the organization will now redouble it's efforts. "with this case, planned parenthood of northern new england is already advicating to ensure that a awoman's health comes first, before political efforts or state barriers to limit choice. Now we have a second goal - working toward a supreme court that continues to protect that access to health and safety" Neither side was willing to speculate about whom President Bush might choose, and if he or she would be acceptable. But abortion is likely to be a key issue for senators - Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy has already said he will vote against a nominee who opposes abortion. And with an upcoming month long senate recess, and the threat of a democratic filibuster, President Bush's nominee may not even be confirmed in time to consider the New Hampshire case. |
Support FromHighlights |