











|
Partial Birth Infanticide, Missouri
Updated November 27, 2000.
The U. S. Supreme Court considered
one type of statutory ban on partial birth abortions in the case, Stenberg
v. Carhart, no. 99-830 (June 28, 2000). The Nebraska law
at issue was struck down for two reasons. First, it did not have
a health exception. But a health exception is a false issue in connection
with infanticides, as these procedures truly are. The AMA has written
that there is no valid medical reason to perform partial-birth abortions,
and the procedures present health dangers to the woman. Furthermore,
under the law, a health exception swallows the other rules that the Supreme
Court has promulgated in the abortion field. To the extent that the
U. S. Supreme Court adheres to a requirement for a health exception, the
Court will not allow the people, through legislators, to ban the partial-birth
killing procedure.
Second, in Stenberg,
the Court acquiesced in the interpretation by lower federal courts of the
scope of the Nebraska statute. They held that the Nebraska statute
covered more than the intended crime and outlawed "normal" abortions, especially
dilatation and evacuation (D & E) abortions most commonly used in the
third month of gestation. By this type of interpretation of the Nebraska
law, the Court found that it created an "undue burden" on abortions by
outlawing the most common methods. Thus, it was unconstitutional
under the standard announced in the 1992 decision, Planned Parenthood
v. Casey. This ground is susceptible to being overcome by more
precise legislative drafting.
Missouri has attempted to
provide a more tightly written statute by addressing the crime as infanticide.
Missouri's statute (H.B. 427) was enacted on September 16, 1999, when the
General Assembly overrode the Governor's veto after a grueling contest
which ran through the summer. (To overcome the Governor's heavy-handed
political pressure exerted on legislators, a rally of pro-life citizens
on September 15 saw the largest crowd ever gathered on the Capitol steps
in Jefferson City. In the afternoon, they formed a prayer chain which
completely encircled the Capitol building.) The essence of H.B. 427
is contained in its third section, as follows: "A person is guilty
of the crime of infanticide if such person causes the death of a living
infant with the purpose to cause said death by an overt act performed when
the infant is partially born or born." The key terms of that sentence,
"living infant" and "partially born," were defined in other portions of
the statute. A section making the statute explicitly inapplicable
to other abortion procedures was included.
Planned Parenthood filed
its attack on this bill in the U. S. District Court in Kansas City the
day after the Governor's veto was overridden. Reproductive Health
Services of Planned Parenthood v. Nixon, case no. 99-4231-CV-C (W.D.
Mo.) Early in 2000, the Special Assistant Attorney General, Jordan
Cherrick, filed a lawsuit against Planned Parenthood in a state court to
have the bill declared lawful and to define the scope of the outlawed acts.
State of Missouri v. Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood
& Crist, case no. 004-00008 (Circuit Court of St. Louis City).
The purpose was to obtain a state-court decision declaring that the Infant
Protection Act does not affect "normal" abortions, but only the killing
of infants when they are almost, but not quite, completely out of the woman's
body. Soon after the filing of the state court action, the federal
judge in Kansas City tried to stop the state proceedings, but his temporary
injunction was reversed by the federal court of appeals, and he was ordered
to abate his proceedings until the state trials were completed. Reproductive
Health Services v. Nixon, Order, case no. 00-1310WMKC (8th Circuit,
March 23, 2000).
On December 5, 2000, the
state circuit court issued a mixed ruling. The court construed the
statute to imply a health exception within a broader clause in the statute
allowing those charged with infanticide to have all defenses otherwise
available by law. Without such an implied health exception, the judge
held, the statute would be unconstitutional under the rulings of the U.
S. Supreme Court. The state court also ruled that only the abortion
procedure known as "D & X abortion" was prohibited by the statute,
which takes away one of the main arguments of the abortionists. It
is likely that an appeal will be filed, perhaps by both sides, and that
the state case will reach the Missouri Supreme Court in due course.
After the state supreme court rules, the federal court litigation will
resume to determine the federal constitutional questions.
If the circuit court's interpretation
of H.B. 427 is upheld by the Missouri Supreme Court, then it is likely
that no language which attempts to ban partial birth abortions will ever
be upheld. Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey
will turn out to mean, as Stenberg v. Carhart indicated, that even
these unspeakable crimes are protected under the United States Constitution.
|