The legal action taken in New York and California to block a ban on late-term abortions could also apply to Iowa, said a local lawyer and professor at Iowa State.

The debate is stirring up strong opinions on both sides.

The legal attack against a new ban on certain late-term abortions rapidly escalated Nov. 6 as federal judges in New York and California blocked the law, delivering a major setback to President George W. Bush only a day after he signed the legislation.

Barbara Mack, associate professor of journalism and communication, said it is legal for federal judges to block such bans.

“If a federal judge believes that a constitutional right is being abridged or halted because of a federal law, the judge has the ability to enjoin or stop enforcement of the law until the underlying case is litigated,” Mack said.

The ruling by the San Francisco judge affects doctors who work at 900 Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide. The San Francisco decision and the ruling in New York hours earlier directly affect a majority of those who provide abortion services in the United States.

A federal judge in Nebraska made a similar ruling Wednesday that covers four abortion doctors licensed in 13 states across the Midwest and East. The ruling came less than an hour after Bush signed the law.

Mack said in both the California and New York cases, the plaintiffs are arguing late-term abortion law is unconstitutional because it does not allow late-term abortions in order to save the life and health of the mother.

“Because there would be a possibility that a pregnant woman might die without a late-term abortion while this case is being litigated, the judge stopped the enforcement of the law until the case is litigated,” Mack said.

The ban being struck down came as no surprise to legal commentators who knew it would be ineffective and challenged, she said.

Mack, who is also an attorney, said she did not think a similar law would be necessary in Iowa.

“It’s fair to assume that now that the law is not being enforced, no state will try to enforce it.”

Mack said the case will likely pass through the trial courts and proceed onto the court of appeals.

“My guess is it will probably be 2005 or 2006 before the case is finally decided on,” she said. “My guess is it will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. It may hear the case, but it’s not obligated to.”

Kim Gordon, executive director of Iowa Right to Life Committee, said she was shocked by the news of the federal judges blocking the abortion ban.

“I think it’s a crime that judges use their position to interfere with legislation,” Gordon said. “It’s tyranny on the judges’ part.”

Gordon said she believes few people in the United States understand late-term abortions were legal until the recent ban.

“It’s infanticide,” she said. “You’re talking about an unborn child and having their brains sucked out, and that’s considered OK.”

Nichole Feuerstein, junior in women’s studies and president of the Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance, said she sees the courts actions as a positive step in the process.

“The partial-birth abortion ban is unconstitutional and will be confronted in the courts,” she said. “I think it’s very good that our judicial system stood up and said they are not going to uphold this ban due to its unconstitutionality.”

—The Associated Press

contributed to this article