Profs: South Dakota bill unlikely to overturn Roe

When the governor of South Dakota signed a bill Monday banning almost all abortions, he started the country down a road that could possibly lead to the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the end of abortion in many states, including Indiana.\nThe bill makes it a crime for doctors to perform abortions except to save the life of the mother. Doctors could face up to five years in prison for performing the procedure in South Dakota, according to The Associated Press.\nEven with the big fight being planned, the Supreme Court probably will not overturn Roe, said Charles Geyh, an IU law professor.\nThe law will be declared unconstitutional by all the lower courts, he said, and the Supreme Court will probably not accept the case because it will not want to interject itself into this divisive issue. \n"The Supreme Court will say 'Why are you doing this to us?'" Geyh said.\nIf the Supreme Court does accept the case, Michael McKillip, the vice president for legislative affairs of Planned Parenthood, said the court probably won't directly overturn Roe, but instead the new ruling would allow more restrictions on abortion.\nOne approach of anti-abortion activists since Roe has been to chip away at abortion rights until it becomes impossible to have an abortion even if it is still legal, said Dawn Johnsen, an IU law professor. \nThis approach is just as dangerous and maybe more so than overturning Roe, McKillip said. He added that any Supreme Court ruling on the South Dakota law could make this tactic easier. \nThe Indiana House and Senate have recently passed a bill, HB 1080, "which would make abortion unavailable without making it illegal" McKillip said. By adding burdensome health regulations, the bill could make it impossible for the clinics to operate, he said. \nThe lengthy process to reach the Supreme Court, which will probably take at least two years, could raise the chances of overturning Roe, Johnsen said. Currently five justices who have upheld abortion rights in the past sit on the court, but Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who has upheld abortion rights in the past, is 86 years old and could possibly retire and be replaced before the abortion ban reached the Supreme Court.\nNo matter how long the legal challenges last, both sides of the battle will be well-funded and organized. An anonymous \ndonor has offered $1 million to help South Dakota defend the bill, and Planned Parenthood, the organization that runs the only abortion clinic in South Dakota, has already seen an increase in donations and has pledged to fight the law, according to the AP.\nMcKillip said the legal battle over Roe could distract the country from the underhanded approach that some state legislatures like Indiana's are using. \n"While we're focused on Roe, women's rights are being eviscerated by the back door like here in Indiana," he said.\nIf Roe does somehow get overturned, it would move the abortion issue to the state level, Geyh said, but it would also make it an even bigger issue on the national level.\nIf the ruling is reversed, the states would be allowed to ban abortions for the first time since 1973 when the court found abortion to be a constitutionally protected right. That would mean that abortion would be legal in some states and illegal in others.\n"What you would see is a further polarizing of red states versus blue states," Geyh said. "That would become a defining feature of states' politics."\nRep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, who favors abortion rights, said he believes if Indiana were given the chance, it would ban abortion. \nThe recent bills that have been moving through the state \nlegislature defining life as beginning at conception and putting stricter health regulations on abortion clinics are evidence that the Indiana legislature would be receptive to an abortion ban, Johnsen said.\nState legislators have already expressed their desire to ban abortion if Roe is overturned, and a bill was introduced this year that would have done that, McKillip said. However, that bill never received a hearing.\nEven though an Indianapolis Star poll said 51 percent of Hoosier residents would not support a bill similar to the one passed in South Dakota, Pierce said he thinks a majority of Indiana legislators would be in favor of a ban on abortion.\n"One poll does not reflect on each individual member's district," he said.\nThe overturning of Roe would dramatically change the political landscape and campaign issues, Pierce said.\nIf the judicial protection Roe provides was taken away, it would energize voters who favor abortion rights to mobilize, he said. Abortion would then become a more pressing issue for both sides.\nAbortion would become the main issue in state legislatures because it would be the first time since 1973 that they would be allowed to rule on the issue, Pierce said. Even now, he said, with the Roe protection, abortion is an issue in state legislature campaigns. \nJust like in state campaigns, abortion would become an even more important issue for national campaigns as well, Geyh said.\n"The Democrats would use this as their rallying cry in the next elections," he said.\nThe U.S. Congress could also pass a ban on abortion that would overrule any state's abortion law. When Congress passed a "partial-birth abortion" ban, it showed its willingness to pass legislation restricting abortion, Johnsen said.\nGeyh added that the presidential race would also concentrate on abortion. A Democrat might pledge to appoint judges to rule in favor of abortion rights, he said. \n"It would turn (abortion) into a virtual ping-pong match," he said.