adios
03-26-2004, 01:24 PM
Here's the link to the article. You might have to register to read it at the link:
Senate Outlaws Injury to Fetus During a Crime (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/26/politics/26VICT.html)
Pro choice advocates were vehemently opposed to this bill.
From the NY Times:
Senate Outlaws Injury to Fetus During a Crime
By CARL HULSE
Published: March 26, 2004
ASHINGTON, March 25 — The Senate approved legislation on Thursday making it a separate offense to harm the fetus in a federal crime committed against a pregnant woman, sending the measure to President Bush for his signature.
Opponents denounced the bill, adopted on a vote of 61 to 38, as an effort to undermine the constitutional right to abortion by recognizing the fetus as a person.
The House passed the measure on Feb. 26, 254 to 163.
The Senate's action was the second major victory in the Republican controlled Congress for the anti-abortion movement, which had sought this legislation since 1999. Last November, Mr. Bush signed into law a ban on the procedure that critics call partial-birth abortion. He strongly supported the latest legislation, referred to as the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, voted against the measure and was criticized by family members of crime victims on hand for the debate.
Both sides anticipate such social issues will loom large this fall in a polarized presidential election, with the opposing campaigns seeking to galvanize their core supporters by highlighting stark differences on social concerns.
In a statement issued Thursday night Mr. Bush said, "Pregnant women who have been harmed by violence, and their families, know that there are two victims — the mother and the unborn child — and both victims should be protected by federal law."
Arguing for approval of the measure, its Senate sponsors listed a series of high-profile crimes like the Laci Peterson murder and said their sole objective was to establish in criminal law the principle that a fetus injured in an assault was just as much a victim of the crime as the expectant mother.
"It's as simple as that," said Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio and the chief Senate author of the measure. "This bill recognizes that when someone attacks and harms a mother and her unborn child, that attack does, in fact, result in two separate victims."
Opponents of the proposal, while saying they sympathized with the desire to severely punish anyone who would attack pregnant women, said they were troubled by the definition of the "child in utero" covered under the bill as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and others said they believed that once that definition was written into federal law it would ultimately be used as an argument to overturn existing laws protecting abortion rights.
"This will be the first strike against all abortion in the United States of America," Ms. Feinstein said. She said a federal statute declaring that life begins at conception could ultimately lead to a court finding that "embryonic stem cell research becomes murder and abortion in the first trimester becomes murder as well."
"That's where this debate is taking us," Ms. Feinstein said, "that's the reason for this bill."
But the Senate rejected on a vote of 50 to 49 her amendment that would have allowed criminals to be charged with a second offense for harming a fetus or terminating a woman's pregnancy without granting new legal status to the fetus.
Senators also rejected another Democratic amendment, one that would have required companies to provide unpaid leave for victims of domestic or sexual violence, a policy that Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, said was a better way to reduce crimes against women.
"Despite the rhetoric, they are not truly willing to do something about domestic violence," Ms. Murray said.
Backers of the measure said that crimes like the slaying in California of Mrs. Peterson had built strong public support for the bill. The body of Mrs. Peterson, who was almost eight months pregnant when she vanished on Christmas Eve 2002, and that of her infant boy washed ashore last April.
Senator Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, exhibited graphic photographs of pregnant crime victims. The measure had never before reached the full Senate.
The Congressional action follows decisions by more than two dozen states to make the fetus a second victim of a crime. A Republican analysis of the legislation said it covered 68 federal crimes of violence such as those occurring on federal lands, in drug trafficking and in the military.
The authors of the bill dismissed the claim that it was a back-door attack on abortion rights, saying the legislation specifically exempts abortions consented to by the woman.
"It's not about abortion," said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and an advocate for the bill in his previous years in the House. "It is about criminals who attack pregnant women."
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, said court reviews of similar existing state laws had found there was no conflict between the criminal statutes and the existing right to an abortion granted under Roe vs. Wade.
"These criminals are not performing abortions," Mr. Johnson said.
A leader of the abortion rights movement said that lawmakers who backed the legislation had sided with conservative anti-abortion activists.
"Instead of passing a consensus bill to punish criminals for their horrific acts, the president's allies are taking advantage of this issue to further their campaign to oppose a woman's right to choose," said Kate Michelman, president of Naral Pro-Choice America.
Records Ruling Stands
A federal judge in Manhattan decided yesterday not to reconsider his order forcing New York-Presbyterian Hospital to turn over to the Justice Department records on abortions performed there, saying that such a move would have "grossly disadvantaged" government preparations for a trial.
The judge, Richard Conway Casey of Federal District Court, issued the order last week, saying the disclosure would not unduly harm the hospital or the privacy of its patients. Judge Casey said the records were not covered by federal laws governing medical privacy because the hospital could delete information that identified women who received abortions.
Senate Outlaws Injury to Fetus During a Crime (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/26/politics/26VICT.html)
Pro choice advocates were vehemently opposed to this bill.
From the NY Times:
Senate Outlaws Injury to Fetus During a Crime
By CARL HULSE
Published: March 26, 2004
ASHINGTON, March 25 — The Senate approved legislation on Thursday making it a separate offense to harm the fetus in a federal crime committed against a pregnant woman, sending the measure to President Bush for his signature.
Opponents denounced the bill, adopted on a vote of 61 to 38, as an effort to undermine the constitutional right to abortion by recognizing the fetus as a person.
The House passed the measure on Feb. 26, 254 to 163.
The Senate's action was the second major victory in the Republican controlled Congress for the anti-abortion movement, which had sought this legislation since 1999. Last November, Mr. Bush signed into law a ban on the procedure that critics call partial-birth abortion. He strongly supported the latest legislation, referred to as the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, voted against the measure and was criticized by family members of crime victims on hand for the debate.
Both sides anticipate such social issues will loom large this fall in a polarized presidential election, with the opposing campaigns seeking to galvanize their core supporters by highlighting stark differences on social concerns.
In a statement issued Thursday night Mr. Bush said, "Pregnant women who have been harmed by violence, and their families, know that there are two victims — the mother and the unborn child — and both victims should be protected by federal law."
Arguing for approval of the measure, its Senate sponsors listed a series of high-profile crimes like the Laci Peterson murder and said their sole objective was to establish in criminal law the principle that a fetus injured in an assault was just as much a victim of the crime as the expectant mother.
"It's as simple as that," said Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio and the chief Senate author of the measure. "This bill recognizes that when someone attacks and harms a mother and her unborn child, that attack does, in fact, result in two separate victims."
Opponents of the proposal, while saying they sympathized with the desire to severely punish anyone who would attack pregnant women, said they were troubled by the definition of the "child in utero" covered under the bill as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and others said they believed that once that definition was written into federal law it would ultimately be used as an argument to overturn existing laws protecting abortion rights.
"This will be the first strike against all abortion in the United States of America," Ms. Feinstein said. She said a federal statute declaring that life begins at conception could ultimately lead to a court finding that "embryonic stem cell research becomes murder and abortion in the first trimester becomes murder as well."
"That's where this debate is taking us," Ms. Feinstein said, "that's the reason for this bill."
But the Senate rejected on a vote of 50 to 49 her amendment that would have allowed criminals to be charged with a second offense for harming a fetus or terminating a woman's pregnancy without granting new legal status to the fetus.
Senators also rejected another Democratic amendment, one that would have required companies to provide unpaid leave for victims of domestic or sexual violence, a policy that Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, said was a better way to reduce crimes against women.
"Despite the rhetoric, they are not truly willing to do something about domestic violence," Ms. Murray said.
Backers of the measure said that crimes like the slaying in California of Mrs. Peterson had built strong public support for the bill. The body of Mrs. Peterson, who was almost eight months pregnant when she vanished on Christmas Eve 2002, and that of her infant boy washed ashore last April.
Senator Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, exhibited graphic photographs of pregnant crime victims. The measure had never before reached the full Senate.
The Congressional action follows decisions by more than two dozen states to make the fetus a second victim of a crime. A Republican analysis of the legislation said it covered 68 federal crimes of violence such as those occurring on federal lands, in drug trafficking and in the military.
The authors of the bill dismissed the claim that it was a back-door attack on abortion rights, saying the legislation specifically exempts abortions consented to by the woman.
"It's not about abortion," said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and an advocate for the bill in his previous years in the House. "It is about criminals who attack pregnant women."
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, said court reviews of similar existing state laws had found there was no conflict between the criminal statutes and the existing right to an abortion granted under Roe vs. Wade.
"These criminals are not performing abortions," Mr. Johnson said.
A leader of the abortion rights movement said that lawmakers who backed the legislation had sided with conservative anti-abortion activists.
"Instead of passing a consensus bill to punish criminals for their horrific acts, the president's allies are taking advantage of this issue to further their campaign to oppose a woman's right to choose," said Kate Michelman, president of Naral Pro-Choice America.
Records Ruling Stands
A federal judge in Manhattan decided yesterday not to reconsider his order forcing New York-Presbyterian Hospital to turn over to the Justice Department records on abortions performed there, saying that such a move would have "grossly disadvantaged" government preparations for a trial.
The judge, Richard Conway Casey of Federal District Court, issued the order last week, saying the disclosure would not unduly harm the hospital or the privacy of its patients. Judge Casey said the records were not covered by federal laws governing medical privacy because the hospital could delete information that identified women who received abortions.