Swinging for the fences, South Dakota lawmakers have rejected a strategy of containing abortion through restrictions and is going for the homerun: outlawing abortion entirely:
The shifting makeup of the United States Supreme Court, the opponents said, offered a crucial opportunity, the first since at least 1992.
"It is a calculated risk, to be sure, but I believe it is a fight worth fighting," State Senator Brock L. Greenfield, a Clark Republican who is also director of the South Dakota Right to Life, told his colleagues in a hushed, packed chamber here.
After more than an hour of fierce and emotional debate, the senators rejected pleas to add exceptions for incest or rape or for the health of the pregnant woman and instead voted, 23 to 12, to outlaw all abortions, except those to save the woman's life.
The governor still has to sign it, but it seems like he probably will. He has previously mentioned a preference for limiting abortion through restrictions.
Is now the time to challenge Roe again in the courts? Well, I'm not sure if Roberts and Alito will be as advertised, but nothing ventured nothing gained. I think perhaps what might be well to see is now that S. Dakota is leading the charge for other states to offer support: begin passing legislation outlawing abortion and flood the courts. The message will at least be sent, a type of civil disobedience, if you will. And if nothing else it will tax the resources of the usual suspects trying to fight it.