Not The Right Time, Not The Right Move

It looks like it may happen. South Dakota's governor says he favors abortion ban. For years the pro-life movement has been foaming at the mouth for an opportunity like this, with a willing state, and a seemingly friendly Supreme Court. Unfortunately for them, this is not the right time, or the right move.

A challenge to Roe v. Wade at the Supreme Court is still unlikely to survive. Even assuming Roberts and Allito join Thomas and Scalia in opposing Roe, that still leaves the conservative wing of the Court one vote shy of overturning the decision. And Anthony Kennedy, the only other nominally conservative member of the Court, was clear in his intentions to uphold Roe in 1992's Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision. The votes are just not there.

Of course, the most interesting fact the article points out: There's only one clinic that performs abortions in the entire state! And South Dakota is a pretty big state. Considering there are many like the lonely libertarian who believe that despite our pro-choice views, there is no right to abortion in the Constitution, lets examine what the practical effect of this law would be. Is shutting down one clinic really imposing much more of a burden on getting an abortion than that which already exists. You're already talking about driving hours and hours to get an abortion. Now maybe you add on a few more hours to get out of state, but for some people, going out of state may have been easier in the first place.

It seems as though both sides of the debate on this issue, pro-death, and anti-choice are more interested in the symbolism at issue than the actual practical effects of the law.