At long last, we have a federal-level, court-produced pro-life victory! Last week’s 5-4 decision by the United States Supreme Court to uphold the 2003 federal ban on the barbaric procedure known as partial-birth abortion could very well become a landmark decision, according to pro-life advocates. In this ruling, the court reversed its previous stance by, for the first time, upholding that the federal government is constitutionally able to forbid a method of performing an abortion. As President Bush said regarding the ruling, “the decision affirms that the Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and humanity of America.”

Friends, the battle to protect the sanctity and dignity of the preborn has been ongoing for more than three decades now, and to be honest, the victories at any level have been few. The battle started just over 34 years ago, with the infamous case Roe v. Wade. Through judicial activism, the constitutional right to an abortion was created by human beings, a fact that stands in sharp contrast with the idea that the rights enumerated in the constitution, including the right to life, are endowed upon us from our Creator.

Without a doubt, the banning of the grotesque procedure is a step towards the day when the preborn enjoy the same constitutional protections as we all do. However, it is still a bit early to clearly say what the long-term effects of the ruling will be. In this victory, we still must soberly accept that only one way to abort a baby was prohibited, and sadly, the ability to abort is still legal. But the early reactions from both pro-life and pro-abortion voices may be a sign that there is more to this decision. Both sides are in agreement that the federal ruling will prompt abortion-restricting legislation at the state level.

In 1997, the Wisconsin legislature passed a bill that banned partial-birth abortions in our state. Then-Governor Tommy Thompson signed the bill into law, which was to take effect in May 1998. Of course, the law was immediately contested in court by those opposed to any restricting of abortion. When the US Supreme Court ruled that Nebraska’s ban was unconstitutional, Wisconsin’s law was stayed, meaning the ban has effectively never been enforced. Because our Wisconsin ban is somewhat different from the federal law the Supreme Court just took action on, there is debate as to whether or not our partial-birth abortion law will be legal in light of the court’s ruling. We fully expect to see some testing of Wisconsin’s law in the near future.

Even prior to the court’s ruling last week, other states had already begun pushing for tougher abortion restrictions. In the past couple of years, legislatures in at least 14 states have considered abortion bans that would outlaw abortion in all or most circumstances, to take effect once Roe v. Wade is overturned.

South Carolina is close to sealing the deal on a law that would require that a woman seeking an abortion must be shown an ultrasound picture of her unborn child prior to the procedure. Other states are attempting to require that abortion clinics meet the same requirements as hospitals. Such efforts remind us that there is a great deal that can be done to make it harder for abortion providers to kill the preborn and endanger the lives of women.

The Nebraska ban and the resulting court case are instructive in light of this recent ruling. In the Nebraska case, the court struck down the ban, because rather than affirming the findings of the Nebraska legislature, the court deferred to the medical community who had not reached a consensus on whether or not the procedure was medically necessary. What makes the recent case so important is that this time, the high court relied on congresses’ findings that an undue burden on a woman would not result from prohibiting partial-birth abortions and further, the congress found the procedure carried significant medical risk to the mother.

What this means, is that the high court could be entering a phase where it will grant more leeway to state and federal legislation that reduces the number and types of abortions, but at same time they must be consistent with the findings of previous pro-abortion rulings. This could signal the end of the abortion-on-demand mentality that has dominated the courts of previous decades. As Justice Kennedy aptly noted in the recent majority opinion, "The law need not give abortion doctors unfettered choice in the course of their medical practice.”

Friends, this is truly an exciting time for us pro-lifers. The addition of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito has changed the balance of the court when it comes to the abortion issue. We will continue to pray, continue to work and continue to hope that perhaps a future court decision moves from restricting the type of abortion to recognizing the personhood of the preborn. And that will indeed be a victory to celebrate!

For Wisconsin Family Council, I’m Julaine Appling reminding you the Prophet Hosea said, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.”