There is no reference to "late term" or in fact to any stage of pregnancy in the ban. Furthermore the description used is so broad that it could easily be claimed to describe
any abortion although to use it to describe a vacuum aspiration abortion which is used in the first trimester would be a stretch (but that doesn't mean they wouldn't try).
While the State Supreme Courts that ruled this legislation unconstitutional found it so on the grounds that there is no "health of the woman" exception included in the legislation they could have just as easily, and as accurately, found it unconstitutional on the same grounds that Justice O'Connor found Steinberg v Carhart unconstitutional - which is:
Nebraska’s statute is unconstitutional on the alternative and independent ground that it imposes an undue burden on a woman’s right to choose to terminate her pregnancy before viability. Nebraska’s ban covers not just the dilation and extraction (D&X) procedure, but also the dilation and evacuation (D&E) procedure, “the most commonly used method for performing pre viability second trimester abortions.” ... By proscribing the most commonly used method for pre viability second trimester abortions, the statute creates a “substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion,” and therefore imposes an undue burden on a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy prior to viability."
Thank you for your comments on the information I provide. I've been attempting to provide the needed information on this fraud since the term "PBA" was first coined - shortly after Dr. Haskell presented his paper to peers describing his use of a variation on
a very old and formerly used abortion method and which those in the AAPI saw as a great source of propaganda by just applying some newspeak to vaugely and emotionally describe it.
The major question facing the SC justices, from the perspective of a woman seeking to end her pregnancy, is whether the justices will deal solely with the "health exception" constitutionality or will also deal with the "undue burden" question the legislation also raises.
Eileen