Groups to fight abortion bans

Kris Kitko leads chants of protest at an abortion-rights rally at the state Capitol in Bismarck, N.D. Legal teams, on both sides of the abortion issue, are preparing to go head-to-head on strict laws in North Dakota and Arkansas. Enlarge photo

James MacPherson/Associated Press file photo

Kris Kitko leads chants of protest at an abortion-rights rally at the state Capitol in Bismarck, N.D. Legal teams, on both sides of the abortion issue, are preparing to go head-to-head on strict laws in North Dakota and Arkansas.

Rival legal teams, well-financed and highly motivated, are girding for court battles during the coming months on laws enacted in Arkansas and North Dakota that would impose the nation’s toughest bans on abortion.

For all their differences, attorneys for the two states and the abortion-rights supporters opposing them agree on this: The laws represent an unprecedented frontal assault on the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established a nationwide right to abortion.

The Arkansas law, approved March 6 when legislators overrode a veto by Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe, would ban most abortions from the 12th week of pregnancy onward. On March 26, North Dakota went further, with Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple signing a measure that would ban abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, when a fetal heartbeat can first be detected and before some women even know they’re pregnant.

Abortion-rights advocates plan to challenge both measures, contending they are unconstitutional violations of the Roe ruling that legalized abortion until a fetus could viably survive outside the womb. A fetus is generally considered viable at 22 to 24 weeks.

“I think they’re going to be blocked immediately by the courts – they are so far outside the clear bounds of what the Supreme Court has said for 40 years,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The center will be leading the North Dakota legal challenge and working in Arkansas alongside the American Civil Liberties Union’s state and national offices. Both Northup and ACLU lawyers say they have ample resources to wage the battles, and they expect victories that would require their attorneys’ fees to be paid by two states.

Dalrymple, in signing the ban, acknowledged that its chances of surviving a court challenge were questionable, but said it was worth the eventual price tag – at this point unknown – in order to test the boundaries of Roe.

North Dakota’s attorney general, Wayne Stenehjem, initially said lawyers from his office would defend any lawsuits, but is now considering hiring outside help. His office is working on a cost estimate for the litigation that could be presented to lawmakers soon.

“We’re looking at a sufficient amount to adequately defend these enactments,” Stenehjem said.

A lead sponsor of the Arkansas ban, Republican state Sen. Jason Rapert, said threats of lawsuits “should not prevent someone from doing what is right.”

He said the ban had a chance of reaching the U.S. Supreme Court through the appeals process and suggested that the victory predictions made by abortion-rights lawyers amounted to “posturing” aimed at deterring other states from enacting similar bans.

In Arkansas and North Dakota, the states’ lawyers will be getting pro bono assistance from lawyers with Liberty Counsel, a conservative Christian legal group.