Changes

50 bytes added ,  18:19, May 6, 2007
→‎Opinion: per talk page
Line 13: Line 13:  
::(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation  of the life or health of the mother. “<ref> Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 165 (U.S. 1973)</ref>
 
::(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation  of the life or health of the mother. “<ref> Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 165 (U.S. 1973)</ref>
   −
This framework allowed the woman's interests to trump the interests of the fetus in all cases. All state regulations of late-term abortions have since been found unconstitutional. Recently the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act (upheld in [[Gonzales v. Carhart]]) approved a ban on a particular kind of late-term abortion procedure. This was the first significant abortion regulation that the Supreme Court has allowed since Roe v Wade.
+
This framework allowed the woman's interests to trump the interests of the fetus in all cases. All state-level total bans of late-term abortions, and late-term abortion procedures, have since been found unconstitutional. Recently the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act (upheld in [[Gonzales v. Carhart]]) approved a ban on a particular kind of late-term abortion procedure. This was the first complete ban on a particular abortion procedure found to be constitutional since Roe v. Wade.
    
==Controversy==
 
==Controversy==
553

edits