http://www.mahablog.com/2005/10/31/better-middle-than-late/

The Court based its decision on two grounds. First, in Part II-A of its opinion, the Court held that the Nebraska law is unconstitutional because it lacks an exception for the preservation of the health of the mother. See 2000 WL 825889, *9-*14. Second, in Part II-B of its opinion, the Court held that the Nebraska statute is unconstitutional because it imposes an undue burden on a woman’s ability to choose the method most commonly used for second trimester abortions, the “dilation and evacuation” (D & E) method. See 2000 WL 825889, *14-*18.

The case also goes to the fundamental dishonesty that has been perpetrated successfully on most American voters, to wit, that Democrats and other pro-choice type persons refuse to accept the very notion of a law forbidding partial-birth abortion; what we oppose is any law which fails to include an exception for the health of the mother, in addition to the life of the mother, or instead of the life of the mother. That’s why all the state partial-birth abortion bans have failed to receive Supreme Court approval; Roe v Wade’s underpinnings go to the health of mothers and their right to protect it. The rightwing whine is always that “health” is too vague a concept, but how specific is “the life” of the mother? What would the approved percentages be that a specific mother might die without this procedure, that would exempt her from the law, and who would decide how much in danger your life has to be. That’s not the way these things work themselves out during an actual pregnancy.

I know someone who ended up having a partial-birth abortion; it was an unwanted abortion of a much wanted baby. When it was discovered that the baby’s brain was outside the skull and there was certainty that it would scarecely live an hour after birth, my dear friends decided to go ahead with the birth; this was their child, they couldn’t bare the thought of their child dying alone, during an abortion. Then the mother developed gestational diabetes, and her blood pressure went crazily high. None of the doctors could give her any kind of precise percentage of what kind of odds she faced in being able to go full term and five birth without having a stroke. One thought the stroke possibility was around 20 percent, others though it higher; they got third and fourth opinions. This was already a family with three children; the parents decided they owed their children better odds on making sure that they continued to have a mother. I viewed much of this agony and I am here to tell you that in many ways I still can’t imagine the pain my friends went through. Try and imagine the horror of having to justify themselves to a pro-life nurse with the power to report them under a Partial birth abortion ban that only mentioned the life of the mother; imagine having to go to court to get permission not to place yourself in a 20 percent danger of having a stroke.

I simply don’t believe that a majority of Americans want to live in that kind of country.

Stare decisis. Once he’s on the SC he can reverse that precedent. Good move by a second tier appellate judge who doesn’t want to get overruled.