My gynecologist made a wise and compelling remark the other day. She said that rather than being banned, late term abortion is THE most important kind to keep legal.
What many people fail to understand, my doctor said, is that a late term abortion is actually the least likely kind of abortion to be used electively - when it is used, it is nearly always medically necessary. In her experience, women who have late term abortions have typically learned late in their prenancy that the fetus has a horrendous condition (e.g., hydrocephalus, or a serious neural tube defect, or serious genetic disorder) where the infant probably will not survive, or may survive but with terrible suffering. Moreover, in some cases (e.g., when the fetus has hydrocephalus), the mother is likely to die in childbirth (and even a ceasarian is highly risky in such cases).
Yes, the details of the procedure itself are gruesome to envision. But so are many life-preserving medical procedures. And more gruesome still are the consequences if such a procedure is withheld from a woman who needs it. For personal stories of women in this dire situation, see this link.
My point (and it is a very simple one) is that so-called pro-choice people (such as Rudy Guliani) who draw the line at late-term abortion appear to be ignorant about this (rare) procedure and the circumstances under which it is most likely to be used.