A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati on Monday upheld a lower court decision that declared unconstitutional a Michigan law banning so-called "partial-birth" abortions, ruling the law poses an "undue burden" on women seeking the procedure, the New York Times reports (Sander, New York Times, 6/5).

The American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Reproductive Rights and the Planned Parenthood Federation of America in March 2005 filed suit in federal court to prevent enforcement of the state law, known as the Legal Birth Definition Act, which would have changed the legal definition of birth to the first moment any part of a fetus is outside a woman's body. The measure, which became law in June 2004, was scheduled to take effect on March 30, 2005, but U.S. District Judge Denise Page Hood approved a temporary restraining order preventing it from being enforced.

Hood in her ruling called the law confusing and vague and said its exceptions for the health or life of a mother are irrelevant and unconstitutional. Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox (R) in February 2006 filed a brief with the appellate court, which stated that a January 2006 U.S. Supreme Court ruling said that lower courts are not required to strike down an entire law when ruling on abortion-related issues. Cox said that more "modest" solutions are possible (Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 10/30/06).

Ruling
The three-judge panel ruled that the Michigan law is broader than a federal law (S 3), upheld in April by the U.S. Supreme Court, and that the state law potentially could apply to abortions using other methods earlier in pregnancy, the Detroit Free Press reports. The panel said that the Michigan Legislature likely would have had favorable result in court if it had copied an Ohio partial-birth abortion ban, which the court previously had upheld (Bell, Detroit Free Press, 6/5).

Judge Boyce Martin, writing for the court, said the Michigan Legislature took a "dragnet approach" to regulating the procedure and "showed no meaningful attempt to comply with the constitutional limitations articulated by federal courts in the area of abortion law." He added that the law did not ban any specific type of abortion procedure. Instead, it created a protected legal status for a partly delivered fetus that it called "perinate," the Times reports (New York Times, 6/5).

Reaction
CRR President Nancy Northup said, "Women, not politicians, should make decisions regarding pregnancy," adding, "Politicians crafted this ban in an attempt to eliminate safe, legal abortions at any cost" (Eggert, AP/Houston Chronicle, 6/4).

Pam Sherstad, spokesperson for Right to Life of Michigan, said that the decision is disappointing because of the work that went into a petition drive that overrode a 2004 veto of the legislation by Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D). "The issue will be reviewed carefully because we feel an obligation to the 460,000 people who signed those petitions," Sherstad said. Cox spokesperson Matt Frendewey said an appeal of the ruling is possible (Detroit Free Press, 6/5).