20 Week Human Fetus

The National Right to Life Committee believes a new pro-life bill could greatly cut through the entire legal structure that maintains legal abortion on demand. For that reason, a congressional pro-abortion leader said on Tuesday that stopping the bill is a high priority for the pro-abortion movement.

The legislation was introduced in the House on January 23, 2012. Its House sponsor is Republican Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona and has 130 cosponsors. The bill is known as H.R. 3803. In the Senate, the bill was introduced by Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah on February 13 and is known as S. 2103.

In a press release, the National Right to Life Committee noted that the legislation is based of an NRLC model bill that has been enacted in Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, and Idaho. Other states are expected to vote on the legislation in 2012. The bill states that at least by 20 weeks after fertilization, an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain. Because of that fact, abortion in the District of Columbia would be prohibited beginning in the sixth month of pregnancy. The bill leaves the ability for an abortion to be performed when the life of the mother is endangered.

In the House, the bill’s greatest opponent is Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting delegate who represents the District of Columbia. Norton wrote to her fellow House Democrats that “Understanding the far-reaching scope of this bill, and the energy and resources that anti-choice [pro-life] advocates are going to put behind it, pro-choice groups have also indicated that stopping this bill will be a top legislative priority in 2012.” Norton also wrote that the bill “has the potential to eviscerate the entire Roe framework.”

Norton also made the claim that the “Republican bullies” are “discriminating” against women “based solely on their residency in the District of Columbia.” In response, National Right to Life Legislative Director Douglas Johnson noted that Norton was incorrect because “the actual legislation simply makes it unlawful to perform an abortion past 20 weeks in the Disctrict, except in cases of life endangerment, regardless of the residency of the woman seeking the abortion.” John also pointed to another important fact: “It should be noted, however, that the available data indicates that the majority of abortions performed within the District are performed on residents of other jurisdictions.”

Johnson believes that bill’s opponents “are seeking to deflect attention away from the shocking fact that abortions are currently unrestricted in the nation’s capital, at any point in pregnancy. At least two abortion vendors are openly advertising late abortions.”

Congresswoman Norton also attempted to discredit the bill by claiming Congress “gave up” the power granted in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that provides that Congress shall ”exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever” over the District. Norton claimed that Congress “gave up” that power in the Home Rule Act in 1973. Norton failed to realize the Home Act states that Congress “reserves the right, at any time, to exercise its constitutional authority as legislature for the District, by enacting legislation for the District on any subject…”