In March, [tag]South Dakota[/tag] Gov. [tag]Mike Rounds[/tag] (R) signed legislation banning nearly all [tag]abortions[/tag] in the state, a measure which generated an immediate [tag]lawsuit[/tag]. As it turns out, however, we may not have to wait for a court ruling to see if the measure stands.
Abortion rights advocates on Tuesday submitted more than 37,000 [tag]signatures[/tag] supporting a [tag]ballot[/tag] [tag]initiative[/tag] to overturn South Dakota’s [tag]ban[/tag] on [tag]abortion[/tag]s.
If the secretary of state verifies the signatures, which number more than twice the amount needed to place a measure on the ballot, South Dakota residents will decide in November whether to keep the strictest ban in the nation.
The measure, which outlaws all abortions — even in cases of rape or incest — unless the mother’s life is at stake, is set to take effect July 1. Doctors who perform an abortion could be fined $5,000 and imprisoned for five years.
Sarah Stoesz, president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood of Minnesota and North and South Dakota, said gathering more than double the needed signatures “proved to be extremely easy.” She added, “It underscores that the governor, the Legislature and the anti-choice movement have over-reached.”
It sets up an interesting test for the law. South Dakota is about as red as red states get, but when [tag]voters[/tag] reach the ballot box, and get to choose in private whether this cruel law survives, will they really support such a sweeping ban?
And here’s an odd twist: will abortion opponents vote to keep the ban in place?
This may seem obvious, but let’s not forget that even ardent opponents of abortion rights were not necessarily thrilled when the South Dakota measure became law.
“I am very purely pro-life, and I would not have undertaken this strategy,” Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway says. She says it plays into “somewhat hysterical claims of extremism” by the left and “seems to give a largely dying, discredited (abortion rights) movement a little bit of gas.” […]
South Dakota state Sen. J.P. Duniphan, who describes herself as a “pro-life” Republican, opposed the law. “It is a very unnecessary, expensive challenge,” she says. “And it is dividing the party.”
Indeed, reading over the reactions from March, there seemed to be something of a consensus: the South Dakota initiative is a huge gamble for opponents of abortion rights, which they very well may lose. Politically, the pro-choice community will use it as a rallying cry, and legally, there are still five votes on the Supreme Court that support Roe’s precedent.
Isn’t it at least possible that some abortion opponents in South Dakota may vote to undo the ban so as to avoid losing court battles and establishing court precedents in the coming months? If there’s a sizable percentage of the anti-abortion movement in the state who believed the law was a mistake, don’t be surprised if they vote strategically in November.