In the winter of 2006, Right to Life of Michigan and others said a proposed Prenatal Child Protection Amendment is not necessary because, they claimed, current Michigan law would immediately outlaw abortion in the state if the U.S. Supreme Court's controversial 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade were to be overturned.
Right to Life of Michigan's web site currently explains its non-support of the proposed amendment as follows: "This amendment will have no impact on stopping abortions so long as Roe v. Wade stands. In addition, Michigan already has a law banning abortion (MCL 750.14), but it is being blocked by Roe. The law is positioned to go back into effect as soon as Roe is reversed." http://www.rtl.org/html/FrontPageMatter/petitionunnecessary1.html
The Detroit News reported: "Right to Life's decision not to support the petition drive is based on legal, financial and practical considerations, (RTL-Michigan President Barb Listing) said. Attorneys have advised the group that a 1931 law on the books would make abortion illegal in Michigan should the Supreme Court reverse Roe v. Wade, so a new law is unnecessary." Detroit News, May 30, 2006 http://detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060530/POLITICS/605300338
Michigan Catholic News reported: “Current state law prohibits abortion in Michigan,” said David Maluchnik, spokesman for The Michigan Catholic Conference, the Church’s public policy arm, “but that law lies dormant due to (the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court Decision) Roe v. Wade. If that decision were to be overturned, Michigan is well-equipped from a statutory perspective to outlaw abortion.” ...“Michigan already has a law banning abortion, which remains dormant due to Roe v. Wade,” Sr. Kostielney wrote. ...Regarding the aim of Michigan Citizens for Life – to create an amendment on the state’s constitution – Maluchnik said the precedent set within state law is strong enough to ensure the illegality of killing unborn children if ever Roe v. Wade should be overturned."
Link Here
-------------------------------------------------
Supporters of the Prenatal Child Protection Amendment disagreed. The Thomas More Law Center, a Catholic public interest law firm, argued the point in a May 3, 2006 news release:
"A detailed legal analysis prepared by the Thomas More Law Center...exposes the grave weaknesses in Michigan’s currently existing law, concluding that the law is insufficient to guarantee a ban on abortions should Roe v. Wade be eventually overturned. The legal analysis points to the need for the Prenatal Child Protection Amendment to Michigan’s Constitution to protect all human life from the moment of conception. Richard Thompson, the President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, earlier in the year had expressed deep concern that after Roe v. Wade was decided, the Michigan Supreme Court interpreted Michigan’s pre-Roe statutory abortion ban to include a broad health exception, and that court interpretation would continue to authorize abortions through all nine months of pregnancy after Roe was overturned." http://www.thomasmore.org/news.html?NewsID=414.
----
Now, in a stunning reversal, Right to Life of Michigan in an internal memorandum dated June 2006 expressly concedes that the Thomas More Law Center was right all along, that under current law, abortion on demand will remain legal in Michigan even if Roe v. Wade is overturned.
"The Legal Status of Abortion in Michigan After Roe Falls," June 2006, prepared by the Right to Life of Michigan Legislative Office, states:
"Abortion will be legal in Michigan as it is presently on the day Roe v. Wade is overturned. ...In Michigan, on the day Roe falls, abortion would still be essentially legal as it is now, because Michigan’s laws have been interpreted by the Michigan Supreme Court to have certain very broad exceptions allowing for abortion as required by Roe and Doe. In a single sentence, Michigan’s law as interpreted by the Michigan Supreme Court under Roe is that: abortion is legal through all nine months of pregnancy, for any reason that the pregnant woman and the abortionist agree would affect her health, with 'health' meaning anything that affects the woman’s “well-being.” (emotional, financial, age, etc.) This is the 'health' exception of Doe v. Bolton that in essence allows for abortion on demand. Unless and until the Court overturns this interpretation, or the Legislature or the public acts to supercede this interpretation, it would remain the status of Michigan law after Roe."
See full Right to Life of Michigan document: http://www.rtl.org/html/pdf/PostRoeStatusFinal.pdf
Note this key passage: Right to Life of Michigan now concedes that "unless and until...the public acts to supercede this (existing legal) interpretation, (abortion on demand) would remain the status of Michigan law after Roe."
A public act precisely such as approving the Prenatal Child Protection Amendment, which only a few weeks ago, Right to Life of Michgian erroneously declared to be unnecessary to stop procedures used to terminate the lives of prenatal children.
The proposed amendment reads:
"The right to due process, whereby no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and the right to equal protection of the law, vest at conception. A 'person' for purposes of the Constitution and laws of the State of Michigan, exists from the moment of conception."
# # #
HT to Darla for the Update above...
No comments:
Post a Comment