Ohio Partial Birth Ban Upheld: A ruling by a federal appeals court suggests the alternative to the recently passed (and challenged) federal ban on "partial birth" abortions. This law, rewritten after a broader one was overturned, specifically includes a protection for maternal health as well as more narrowly defining the procedure so others are not potentially brought in under its reach. The opinion honors the reasoning behind the ban in that it: "reflects interests in preventing unnecessary death and cruelty to partially born children, maintaining a strong public policy against infanticide, and preserving the integrity of the medical profession." All the same, it respects the evils of a broad law.

Not so the federal government. Their law has no maternal health provision, is not as narrowly drawn, and has other problems. Now, the dissent made a case that the majority defined the maternal health issue too narrowly [especially in regards to pre-viable abortions] and/or read the law the same way so that it would be legitimate. This is only a matter of careful drafting and reflects that courts might not be likely to decide things quite as liberally as some might like. The broader point is that if we leave this matter to the states and insure that the laws are carefully written, they might very well be upheld. The alternative federal ban is just plain counterproductive except as a political device.