USA U.S. feminists challenge court abortion decision THE United States Supreme Court's June 29 ruling on Pennsylvania state's 1989 Abortion Control Act has added new fuel to the battle over women's right to choose in the United States. The decision upheld the power of a state to restrict abortion rights by requiring unmarried teenage females to get the consent of their parents or a judge, establishing a 24-hour waiting period for adult women and mandating doctors to keep detailed records of each abortion — information which will be subject to public disclosure.
In addition, the Court approved the requirement that, before the waiting period, women must be given stateproduced anti-abortion information which includes pictures of foetuses taken at two week gestational intervals and a description of alternatives to abortion. The only substantial provision rejected by the court was the requirement that a women must notify her husband of an intention to obtain an abortion.
choose. The issue has proven to be so powerful that it has driven a wedge in the major capitalist party with the stron gest official anti-abortion position.
The National Republican Coalition for Choice has lined up state delegations for a floor fight over abortion at the National Convention in August, and has sent out a strongly worded letter across the country to organize pro-choice activities within that party and to "fight for a national party platform that reflects the pro-choice views of the majority of Republicans".
Feminist activists have been heavily involved in lobbying state legislators and members of the US Congress, and are currently campaigning for pro-choice candidates. In very important respects, this dependency on major capitalist party politicians will be strengthened by the court's ruling on the Pennsylvania law.
There are currently more women candidates running for public office at the state and national levels than before -and it appears that there is a good chance to elect more pro-choice women than in previous years. Countervailing trends at work
Electoralist activities on behalf of pro-choice Democrats and Republicans are being pushed by all major feminist organizations. At the same time, there are two countervailing trends: the success of mass mobilizations and the development of independent political action.
The entire nation was impressed by the largest-ever mobilization which involved 750,000 abortion rights demonstrators in Washington DC on April 5 of this year (see /V 226).
In addition the pro-choice movement has consistently outnumbered Operation Rescue (called 'Operation Oppress You" by feminists) in highly successful, wellorganized actions at women's clinics. These public expressions by abortion rights advocates created and perpetuates a pro-choice climate — and may have helped persuade the Supreme Court justices to go out of their way to uphold Roe v. Wade.
The already mobilized pro-choice movement responded to the Supreme Court's June 29 decision with immediate street demonstrations. In many cities, feminist groups had organized beforehand to hold street actions the day the Supreme Court decision was announced.
In other places, "day after" actions took place. For example, the Los Angeles, California, branch of the National Organization for Women (NOW) telephoned members and supporters in mid-June to alert them to demonstrate in front of the downtown Federal Building
EVELYN SELL B Y a 5-4 majority, the justices utilized the approach that states can impose regulations which do not constitute an "undue burden" on a woman's right to end an early pregnancy. In fact, each of the approved provisions do inflict such a burden — resulting in a gutting of the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision which established legal abortions.
The US mass media emphasized the fact that the legal right to abortion was affirmed by the Supreme Court. In fact, the court majority transformed the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision into a hollow shell by limiting women's right to choose during the period before foetal viability, and by deepening and expanding a state's power to regulate abortions at any point during the pregnancy.
In 1989, the Supreme Court opened the door to a state's authority to impose restrictions on women's abortion rights in the case of Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, a Missouri state law.
Exactly what states could or could not restrict was not defined but in 1990 the court ruled that states can require minors to notify one or more parents or receive 14 a judge's permission before obtaining an abortion. Over the past two years, more than 800 bills limiting abortion rights have been introduced in 40 different state legislatures.
With this latest decision, the Supreme Court has added new measures to the approved list of restrictions. The present bare majority of five who did not completely overturn Roe v. Wade can be suddenly turned into a minority.
Four justices wrote a dissenting statement declaring themselves ready to strike down Roe v. Wade and to permit states to outlaw abortion. This leaves women teetering on the brink of total disaster.
Wishful thinking of antichoice lobby
Anti-choice politicians quickly asserted that the court's decision removed the abortion question as a hot issue during the current election campaign. That is wishful thinking on the part of opponents of abortion rights.
The majority of the US population continues to support basic abortion rights, and the feminist movement has engaged in a persistent struggle to safeguard and expand women's right to
International Viewpoint # 233 • July 20, 1992
SINESE
USA conting soon.
BOHED ABORTIONS
ARTE CARE & MORTARY WING
Fraineer GEORSE BUSH
Anita: SPREME CONT
Contactor: OTERATION PRICHE"