Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Ind. Law - "Roe v. Wade turns 40: What has happened in Indiana"
The Indianapolis Star has this story on its website this afternoon, written by Shari Rudavsky and Cathy Knapp. It begins by stating that "40 years ago today the debate over abortion entered a new arena when the Supreme Court issued its monumental Roe v. Wade decision." Here is the decision, from Jan. 22, 1973.
Most of the online story is devoted to a "History of Indiana's abortion law." However, this detailed Star history begins on April 19, 1995, and moves forward from there, to Nov. 23, 2005.
Did nothing happen in Indiana from 1973, when Roe was decided, until 1995, and from 2005 until 2013?
Perhaps the Star's online archives only goes back to 1995? Actually, they appear to go back to 1991. For instance, here from the archives is a snippet from May 24, 1991 that begins: "Supporters of abortion rights called the ruling - which bans abortion counseling at federally funded family planning clinics - callous and shocking, while abortion opponents praised it for rejecting the "bizarre concept" that treats abortion the same as contraception."
Perhaps the reporters were confused by the source notes to IC 16-34-1, Indiana's abortion law. The source notes indicate that IC 16-34-1 was added by P.L.2-1993, SEC.17. Did the reporters assume that Indiana had no abortion statute prior to 1993? But a little research shows that PL 2-1993 was an LSA "recodification" bill that repealed existing law and reenacted it in substantively the same form, but with different numbers. According to this table, the source of IC 16-34-1 was IC 16-10-3.
For a glimpse at a much richer Indiana history on aspects of this topic, look at Maurer Law Prof. Dawn Johnsen's [yes, that Dawn Johnsen] 2009 Yale Law Journal article, “TRAP”ing Roe in Indiana and a Common-Ground Alternative. Two quote from Johnsen's article:
- [Pre-1995] A measure of complacency has prevailed among Roe’s supporters since the Court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. By contrast, during the decade prior to Casey, abortion ranked high among the issues that occupied law and politics. Two successive presidents, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, were elected on platforms that called for the appointment of Justices who would overrule Roe. By the time the Court announced it would hear Casey, those two presidents had appointed five Justices and elevated a sixth to Chief Justice, and the Court appeared to have the votes to overrule Roe.
- [Post-2005] To help explore some of the ramifications and lessons of abortion restrictions short of direct bans, this Essay takes as its principal example efforts to restrict access to abortion services in Indiana. In 2006, the year South Dakotans first rejected an abortion ban, an Indiana legislator also introduced a bill to outlaw abortion in most circumstances.13 That bill did not even progress to the point of a hearing, but two moderate-sounding bills that would have restricted the provision of abortion services came close to enactment. One of these bills is particularly worthy of study because, under the guise of health-related building standards, it would have ended the provision of abortion services at every clinic operating in the state. The phrase “TRAP laws,” which is short for targeted regulation of abortion providers, is sometimes used to describe such regulations by those who oppose them. Indiana abortion providers, like those throughout the country, continue to confront these and other restrictions in the state legislature and—beginning in 2008—in county commissions as well, in what the president of Indiana Right to Life described as “a new strategy” to work at the county level.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 22, 2013 04:30 PM
Posted to Indiana Law