TIMELINE: Partial-birth abortion

By Tom Strode - Apr 18, 2007 - comment

In September 1992, Martin Haskell, an Ohio abortion doctor, described a second-trimester abortion method he named “dilation and extraction” (D&X) in a paper presented at a National Abortion Federation-sponsored seminar.

Following is a chronology of the attempt to prohibit the procedure widely known as partial-birth abortion:

  • Early 1993: The National Right to Life Committee obtains Haskell’s paper and later publicizes it and begins a campaign to outlaw the procedure.
  • June 1995: Rep. Charles Canady, R-Fla., introduces in the House of Representatives a bill titled the Partial-birth Abortion Ban Act to prohibit the procedure; Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., introduces a companion bill in the Senate.
  • November 1995: The House of Representatives approves the Partial-birth Abortion Ban Act for first time, 288-139.
  • December 1995: The Senate passes the ban for first time, 54-44.
  • April 1996: President Clinton vetoes the legislation.
  • June 1996: Southern Baptist Convention approves a resolution supporting the ban and disapproving of Clinton’s veto.
  • September 1996: House overrides Clinton’s veto with a two-thirds majority, 285-137; Senate falls short of a two-thirds majority, 57-41, thus sustaining the veto.
  • March 1997: House passes reintroduced ban, 295-136.
  • May 1997: Senate approves ban, 64-36.
  • October 1997: Clinton vetoes the ban for a second time.
  • July 1998: House overrides veto, 296-132.
  • September 1998: Senate falls short in override attempt, 64-36, thus sustaining the veto for a second time.
  • October 1999: Senate approves ban in next session of Congress, 63-34.
  • April 2000: House passes slightly different version, 287-141; Congress fails to work out a final version to send to the president.
  • June 2000: Supreme Court votes 5-4 in Stenberg v. Carhart case to overturn Nebraska’s partial-birth abortion ban, which is modeled after the federal measure.
  • June 2002: SBC adopts resolution calling for President Bush to make enactment of a partial-birth abortion ban a priority.
  • July 2002: House passes revised version of the Partial-birth Abortion Ban in 274-151 vote. Senate never acts on bill during this session of Congress.
  • March 2003: Senate votes 64-33 in favor of ban, but its version includes non-binding resolution endorsing 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion.
  • June 2003: House votes 282-139 for ban, minus the resolution endorsing Roe v. Wade.
  • September 2003: House-Senate conference committee reports out final bill without Roe resolution.
  • October 2003: House approves conference committee report on bill, 281-142; Senate passes conference committee report, 64-34.
  • Nov. 5, 2003: President Bush signs the ban into law.
  • Nov. 5-6, 2003: Three U.S. District judges issue injunctions preventing law from going in effect. The judges, along with three appellate courts, subsequently strike down the ban as unconstitutional.
  • April 18, 2007: U.S. Supreme Court, in 5-4 ruling, reverses lower courts and upholds ban on partial-birth abortion.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Family, Children, Life, Abortion, Citizenship, Legislation, National

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com