After decades of campaigning to overturn Roe v. Wade, it appears the pro-life movement has been caught flat-footed in the aftermath of its greatest victory.
Michigan Democrats have succeeded in getting an initiative placed on this fall’s ballot that would effectively legalize all abortions. But that isn’t how Democrats are describing the initiative. They want you to believe that their proposed amendment to Michigan’s constitution would merely “codify Roe v. Wade.” That is, the amendment would reinstate for Michigan the constitutional right struck down by the federal Supreme Court.
But in reality, the proposal goes much further than that. Here is what the operative language says:
“Notwithstanding the above, the state may regulate the provision of abortion care after fetal viability, provided that in no circumstance shall the state prohibit an abortion that, in the professional judgment of an attending health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.
“…A state interest is “compelling” only if it is for the limited purpose of protecting the health of an individual seeking care consistent with accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence based medicine, and does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision making.”
There is no way any regulation of abortion would survive this constitutional amendment.
First, the “mental health” exception is so comprehensive that it is impossible to think of a single abortion it wouldn’t apply to. Where such mental health provisions are law in other countries, women in practice always find a doctor to say their mental health makes an abortion necessary. This is simply abortion on demand. Since Democrats constantly tell us that “abortion is health care,” every abortionist would be an “attending health care professional” under the amendment. And why would any abortionist not say that an abortion is needed for the “mental health” of the client paying them?
Second, look at the definition of “compelling” state interest. Notice that it only mentions the health “of an individual seeking care.” The baby is never mentioned. The amendment makes it impossible for the legislature to pass any legislation designed to protect the lives of babies in utero. By the definition of this amendment, no unborn baby’s life can ever be a “compelling” interest of the state.
This is a radical amendment that would legalize all abortions up until the second of birth. And yet Democrats already have outlets such as the Wall Street Journal parroting their talking points that the amendment “would mirror the Supreme Court’s old standard under Roe v. Wade.”
Opponents of the amendment are reportedly trying to label it an “anything goes” abortion initiative. They are right about what the amendment would do. I don’t know if they have the right messaging to win the political battle yet, though.
