|
home > legislation > 2004 legislative report
S.B. 69 Partial Birth Abortion
Senate
Judiciary, Law Enforcement,
and Criminal Justice Committee
Utah State Capitol
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
January
20, 2004
RE: Unconstitutionality
of S.B. 69 Partial Birth Abortion
Dear Committee
Members,
The ACLU
of Utah implores the committee to vote against Senate Bill 69 because
it is constitutionally defective and therefore subject to legal challenge.
S.B. 69, which is nearly identical to federal legislation struck down
in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000), is unconstitutional on
two grounds: it fails to include an exception for the health of the
pregnant woman and it is too broad.
The Supreme
Court of the United States has consistently required exceptions to preserve
both the health and life of the pregnant mother when the government
attempts to prohibit abortion. Stenberg v. Carhart, following precedent
established in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) and Planned Parenthood
of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), made clear that any
prohibition on abortion that does not contain both exceptions is unconstitutional.
While S.B. 69 provides a life exception in section 76-7-326, the bill
fails to provide a health exception. Absent a health exception the bill
is unconstitutional. The recently enacted federal “Partial-Birth
Abortion Ban Act of 2003” also lacks a health exception, which
has prompted three federal courts to block the ban from taking effect.
S.B. 69
is also unconstitutional because the range of safe abortion procedures
it prohibits is too broad. By prohibiting a range of procedures, the
bill likely places an “undue burden” on a woman’s
right to seek an abortion before viability. See Stenberg, 530 U.S. at
939.
The committee
should vote against S.B. 69 because it constitutes an unconstitutional
restriction on abortion access and is subject to attack in court.
Sincerely,
Margaret Plane
Staff Attorney
|
|
|