�鶹Ů��

The Oklahoma Legislature on Thursday passed a bill that would effectively ban abortions by subjecting doctors who perform them to felony charges and revoking their medical licenses — the first legislation of its kind. In a year in which states have tried to outlaw abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy, to ban the main surgical method used in the second trimester and to shut down abortion clinics with onerous regulations, Oklahoma’s bill is the most far-reaching. (Eckholm, 5/19)

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, an anti-abortion Republican, has until Wednesday to sign the bill into law or veto it. Spokesman Michael McNutt said she also could also allow the bill to become law "without approval" after the five-day period has elapsed. He also said she will withhold comment until her staff has time to review it. [Republican Sen. Nathan] Dahm made it clear that he hopes his bill could lead to overturning Roe v. Wade. "Since I believe life begins at conception, it should be protected, and I believe it's a core function of state government to defend that life from the beginning of conception," said Dahm, R-Broken Arrow. (5/19)

"They are being inundated with calls from women asking whether they can get the abortion care they need,” said Kelly Baden, director of state advocacy for the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights, whose attorneys are representing the clinics. “For Oklahoma legislators to put women in this position -- it's unfathomable and cruel." The measure was sponsored by Republican state Sen. Nathan Dahm, a software engineer and son of missionaries who has said he hopes it will help overturn Roe vs. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court case that legalized abortion nationwide. (Hennessy-Fiske, 5/19)

State Sen. Ervin Yen, a physician who voted against the bill, called it “insane” and said he's certain the bill would face a court challenge. "I'm Republican. I'm Catholic. I'm pro-life," Yen told USA TODAY after the vote. "But I think it is silly for us to pass bills in Oklahoma that can't go anywhere. It's a constitutional problem." Michael McConnell, a Stanford law professor and former federal judge appointed by George W. Bush, also expressed skepticism. "No constitutional argument is available to support this bill under current precedent, and it is exceedingly unlikely that a majority of the Supreme Court would vote to overrule that precedent," McConnell told USA TODAY. (Bacon, 5/19)

This new measure criminalizing performing abortions is largely symbolic — except for taxpayers, who will shoulder the burden of defending it in court. This is because it runs afoul of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion until fetal viability nationwide, as well as the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision that reaffirmed the Roe ruling and also introduced a new standard for evaluating whether restrictions on abortion access constitute an “undue burden” on patients. (Lachman, 5/19)