Pro-Life News -- Digest #607

New Jersey: Virginia Law's Success Bodes Well for NJ

Trenton -- The decade-long push to prohibit New Jersey abortion practitioners from performing abortions on minors without first telling their parents got a boost when the U.S. Supreme Court left intact Virginia's parental notification law.

Without comment, the justices declined to review a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit that places the duty of parents to be involved in their children's upbringing above the child's having an abortion without their knowledge.

In leaving the Virginia law in force, the justices thrilled those who want New Jersey to join the 39 states that have laws on the books banningabortions for minors without their parents' knowledge.

''I hope that the Legislature will now take a serious look at passing a parental notification law in New Jersey," said Marie Tasy, director of public and legislative affairs for New Jersey Right to Life.

Assemblyman John Rooney (R), who has been sponsoring a parental notification bill since 1990, said the high court's action "absolutely" will help get it out of the committee where it is languishing. 'This will probably be the boost it really needs," Rooney said.

Sen. Gerald Cardinale (R), who is sponsoring the identical measure in the upper house, said he has been promised it will get a hearing and the court action bolsters its prospects.

But even if their legislation should pass, it faces veto threats from pro-abortion Gov. Christie Whitman.

Requiring the parents of a girl under 18 to be notified before her pregnancy is terminated is not about abortion rights, Rooney said, "It's parental rights." That position found support in the decision by six federal judges on the 4th Circuit upholding Virginia's parental notification law in August.

''A mother and father who assume the responsibility of the highest calling in life are entitled to the fullest possible measure of not only constitutional solicitude, but constitutional encouragement, in their sacred endeavor," the judges wrote. "They are obliged to know, and they are entitled to know, the life-defining decisions their children face."

They went on to say that laws that merely require that parents be notified before their daughter has an abortion need not provide all of the safety valves that are required when the parents have the right to veto their daughter's decision. In that case, the Supreme Court has ruled the pregnant teen must have the alternative of going to a judge for permission for the abortion, which must be granted if the judge finds the teen is mature enough to make an informed decision.

Rooney's and Cardinale's bills allow a pregnant teen to go to a judge only if she has been abused or neglected. A majority of the judges on the 4th Circuit said that is enough to satisfy the U.S. Constitution.

This page is reformatted and published by Christ's Faithful People from the News Letters of Steven Ertelt of Pro-Life InfoNet.