Irin Carmon at NBC News has an interesting take on the so-called “heartbeat” abortion bill that made its way to Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s desk this week, as my colleague Liz Birge has reported. If Kasich signs the bill, it will ban abortions as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which is typically in the embryonic stage of development, as early as six weeks’ gestation. That is before many women even know they are pregnant.
The bill is utterly unconstitutional because it cuts against Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling that states cannot ban abortion before fetal viability. Similar bills have fallen to federal district court rulings in North Dakota and Arkansas. But Carmon reports that Kasich, a staunch forced-birther, might very well veto the heartbeat bill. That wouldn’t upset the leader of Ohio Right to Life.
That’s because that organization, networked with forced-birthers across the nation, doesn’t support the fetal heartbeat bill. They know it would not survive the high court’s scrutiny. Instead, they want Kasich’s signature on a bill imposing a 20-week abortion ban, and he seems likely to make them happy.
The 20-week ban is also unconstitutional because fetal viability is several weeks later. But advocates in Ohio, and 18 other states where a ban has passed in one form or another, have been maneuvering to get a favorable Supreme Court ruling on such a law specifically because it is not as extreme as the heartbeat bill:
Nationally, Kasich has sought to present himself as a moderate. He told CNN in August, referring to abortion, that Republicans "focus too much on just one issue." The dueling abortion bills arguably present him with an opportunity to split the difference. If Kasich vetoes the heartbeat bill while quietly signing a 20 week ban into law, he would seemingly take the more measured path.
"Speaking just as Mike Gonidakis," said the Ohio Right to Life President, "I think that would set him up well."
The Supreme Court has rejected appeals seeking to overturn lower court orders barring the 20-week ban in Arizona, Georgia, and Idaho. But it hasn’t ruled to overturn the bans nationwide. That would take two new anti-abortion justices on the court, one to replace Antonin Scalia and another to replace a justice not already on board to attack Roe. As president, Donald Trump may very well get the opportunity to appoint two or more new justices. If a reconstituted court majority were to remove fetal viability from consideration, which approving a 20-week ban would certainly do, the underpinnings of Roe would be wrecked.
