Spring Break
Court supports abortion decision
By: Staff & Wire
Issue date: 4/19/07 Section: News
Bitterly divided most of the time, both sides in the abortion debate agreed on one thing Wednesday: Elections and Supreme Court nominees matter.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote Wednesday's opinion for a conservative majority allowing the first nationwide ban on an abortion procedure since the Roe v. Wade decision upholding abortion rights in 1973.
Kelly Hoffman, a sophomore international studies major, said he supported the Supreme Court's decision.
"I'm morally opposed to abortion," Hoffman said. "If abortion cannot be banned from an immoral standpoint, than it should at least be done so from a practical one. I support Congress preventing abortion however indirectly they do it, with the exception of rape or the mother being endangered, of course."
In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the ruling "cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court."
It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how - not whether - to perform an abortion.
The outcome is likely to spur efforts at the state level to place more restrictions on abortions.
"I support it and believe it's important because it protects the sanctity of life," Sarah Hulsey, a junior cell biology major, said of the ruling.
Ginsburg called the decision alarming and said the latest decision "tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists."
"This ruling limits a woman's right to choose and encourages more states to pass similar restrictions," said Samantha Chui, sophomore political science and economics major and founder of the American Civil Liberties Union, College Station chapter.
Travis Robinson contributed to this report
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote Wednesday's opinion for a conservative majority allowing the first nationwide ban on an abortion procedure since the Roe v. Wade decision upholding abortion rights in 1973.
Kelly Hoffman, a sophomore international studies major, said he supported the Supreme Court's decision.
"I'm morally opposed to abortion," Hoffman said. "If abortion cannot be banned from an immoral standpoint, than it should at least be done so from a practical one. I support Congress preventing abortion however indirectly they do it, with the exception of rape or the mother being endangered, of course."
In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the ruling "cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court."
It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how - not whether - to perform an abortion.
The outcome is likely to spur efforts at the state level to place more restrictions on abortions.
"I support it and believe it's important because it protects the sanctity of life," Sarah Hulsey, a junior cell biology major, said of the ruling.
Ginsburg called the decision alarming and said the latest decision "tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists."
"This ruling limits a woman's right to choose and encourages more states to pass similar restrictions," said Samantha Chui, sophomore political science and economics major and founder of the American Civil Liberties Union, College Station chapter.
Travis Robinson contributed to this report
Be sure to include your name, major, and class year. Submissions without this information are subject to deletion.
By submitting a comment, you agree to thebatt.com's Terms of Use.
You may also send a Mail Call to The Battalion at mailcall@thebatt.com