.bmp)
.bmp)
Pro-family Supreme Court observers are "disappointed" that justices passed up an opportunity to protect human life this week.The U.S. Supreme Court recently refused to hear a case in which the state of Michigan and pro-lifers sought to uphold a ban on partial-birth abortion. Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, says the Michigan law simply sought to protect unborn children from the horrors of partial-birth abortions. He says the law was not a general ban on abortions as the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had claimed."The Supreme Court's decision not to hear this case is a clear disappointment for those seeking the humane protection of the unborn," notes Dacus."The majority on this Supreme Court is supposed to be one that respects the will of the people and is not to engage in judicial activism."The Sixth Circuit found that the law was overly broad and could have been used to prohibit some abortion procedures that did not fall under the court's interpretation of the legislature's intent.In response to the decision, Right to Life of Michigan has promised to promote a state law identical to the current federal ban, which has been upheld by the Supreme Court.But Dacus is confident that the right of states to restrict or prohibit partial-birth abortion will come before the high court again. And he says the only way to ensure a victory next time is to "have the right person in the White House willing to respect the Constitution and appoint a justice who does the same."As in the days of Noah...
