Archive for the ‘Amendment 48’ Tag
The North Dakota House of Representatives approved a bill that would grant human rights to fertilized egg cells, a move designed to challenge abortion and Roe v. Wade. The bill passed 51-41 and now moves on to the 47-member state Senate.
If passed by the Legislative Assembly and signed into law by the Governor, the bill will face a challenge in the courts, which will almost certainly declare it unconstitutional and a violation of Roe v. Wade. Critics say that defending the law in the courts will be an unnecessary expense for the state, since defeat is almost certain. The current composition of the Supreme Court, and the likely composition after any Obama appointments, make it unlikely that that tribunal would intervene to overturn its prior precedents in abortion law.
The operative text of the bill reads as follows:
References to individual, person, or human being – Legislative intent. For purposes of interpretation of the constitution and laws of North Dakota, it is the intent of the legislative assembly that an individual, a person, when the context indicates that a reference to an individual is intended, or a human being includes any organism with the genome of homo sapiens.
The measure is very similar to Colorado’s Amendment 48 (blogged about in detail here), which would have modified that state’s constitution to define a fertilized egg as a person. The people of Colorado examined the issue closely and handed Amendment 48 a huge defeat—73.3% of voters rejected it, almost a 3:1 margin.
To abortion opponents this sort of thing may sound good, but upon examination the law becomes extremely problematic. Not only abortion, but many common forms of birth control that prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus would be illegal; women on the pill could potentially be charged with murder. The law would also be likely to have a chilling effect on the medical community for various reasons.
Even if the law was a good idea, it is so likely to be struck down in the courts that passing it would amount to only a fairly costly symbolic gesture. I think the people of North Dakota have more important business for their legislators to be attending to.
This November the citizens of Colorado will be deciding on 18 ballot initiatives, including one which would amend the state’s constitution to expand the definition of person to include a fertilized egg. The measure is called–deceptively, according to some opponents–the Colorado Equal Rights Amendment, and is also known as the Definition of Person Initiative or Amendment 48.
The text of the initiative reads as follows:
Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado: SECTION 1. Article II of the constitution of the state of Colorado is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read: Section 31. Person defined. As used in sections 3, 6, and 25 of article II of the state constitution, the terms “person” or “persons” shall include any human being from the moment of fertilization.
Supporters obtained 103,000 valid signatures to get the measure on the ballot; 76,000 were needed. They hope the measure will make illegal most, if not all, abortions in Colorado. Focus on the Family, which is headquartered in Coloado Springs, is one of several groups supporting the measure.
The amendment is the brainchild of 21-year old Kristi Burton, who says “The word ‘person’ in our constitution has never been defined and because of that, there’s a whole group of people in Colorado who aren’t protected. And, certainly that would be the unborn child.” Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun, author of the Roe v. Wade decision, said that the right to an abortion would be nullified by the rights of the unborn if the unborn constituted a person with rights. As Justice Antonin Scalia argued in his dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey,
The whole argument of abortion opponents is that what the Court calls the fetus and what others call the unborn child is a human life. Thus, whatever answer Roe came up with after conducting its “balancing” is bound to be wrong, unless it is correct that the human fetus is in some critical sense merely potentially human. There is, of course, no way to determine that as a legal matter; it is, in fact, a value judgment. Some societies have considered newborn children not yet human, or the incompetent elderly no longer so.
He further argued that “The States may, if they wish, permit abortion on demand,” if the unborn are not considered persons, “but the Constitution does not require them to do so,” since it contains no definition of person that speaks to the issue at hand.
Legally, the abortion debate is not really about whether killing unborn persons is okay or not–everyone agrees that killing people is wrong. The issue is at what stage personhood is gained in the developmental process, from egg to birth, personhood is gained. The Colorado ballot measure attempts to legally define that point.
The measure has many opponents, who have said that the measure may criminalize certain popular forms of birth control, like the morning-after pill and intra uterine devices, which operate by preventing the implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterus. This could be tantamount to murder if Amendment 48 is approved.
Abortion rights groups are joined by the state’s major medical associations and societies in opposing the measure, which could make doctors who treat women of child bearing age liable to criminal prosecution, since just about anything more involved than taking a woman’s temperature could potentially impact the health and prospects of a fertilized egg that she is carrying. Treatment of ectopic pregnancies, which often involves the termination of the pregnancy to protect the life of the mother, might also be considered murder, though I suspect the courts would eventually rule that terminating such a pregnancy, which presents serious risks to the mother, is okay. However, most agree that lots of litigation is probable if the amendment passes.
Incidentally, only about 50% of all fertilized eggs implant in the womb. Of those that do, about one in five will miscarry without human intervention. (A large portion of these failures are due to genetic abnormalities.) Thus, one might say that, if this Amendment passes, something like 60% of all people in Colorado are never even born, for completely non-abortion related reasons.
I couldn’t locate any polling data on the measure, but I think this vote will be another interesting one to watch on election night. Colorado polls close at 7pm Mountain Time; the state is widely considered a swing state in this year’s presidential election.