How does the population break down? I figure, with the exception of Texas, most abortion-banning states will be fairly small, so the population would be disproportionately located in legal abortion states. Not much of a silver lining, but that's one hell of a dark cloud.

A few years ago I attended a Planned Parenthood event held in metropolitan Kansas City to honor Missouri and Kansas state legislators who were pro-choice. My Missouri representative was honored at the event. All of the Missouri legislators so honored were members of the Democratic Party. It was not the case when it came to Kansas. At the luncheon I sat at a table with two Kansas republican legislators. I made a point of shaking their hands because up until then "I had never met a pro-choice republican."

The republican suburbs of Kansas City in Kansas are a significant portion of the pro-choice population for that state.    

that he lists are just farfetched. Under "battleground" he has: DELAWARE, MASSACHUSSETTS and NEW MEXICO. Delaware and New Meixco both have Democratic governors, and I doubt EITHER would sign an abortion-banning bill. It would be the absolute end of Richardson's career. Massachussetts? Doesn't the Republicans only hold like 4 seats in the legislature? Don't make me laugh.

Other states that he probably has wrong: Arizona (Dem. Governor, unlikely), Arkansas(Even though it's pro-life, the legislature has a dem Supermajority), Colorado(Dems control legislature...), Michigan(Granholm signing this? Are you insane?), Minnesota(Somehow the idea of Minnesota banning abortions seems like it would be political suicide for every Pro-life politician that votes "yes" including the Governor), Rhode Island(Do I even have to explain?), Wisconsin (Doyle would veto that B like no other)

I say: Let the people get what the people want. And then change people's opinions if your not happy with them.

Deciding the abortion issue through courts was not just undemocratic, it might also have hurted the pro-choice cause in the long run. In the rest of the western world, where there is nothing akin to the Supreme Court, abortion rights are uncontroversial today. People have been convinced to accept them, through reasons and through experimenting with different approaches to the issue.

Pushing abortion rights through the courts energized the opposition and ultimately helped move the political landscape in America to the right. The RR would not have existed today if it wasn't for Roe vs Wade.

I think those predictions are way off base. Nothing like that will happen.

First of all, let me say that the days of Roe vs. Wade are numbered. For those Democrats who didn't think that voting for Bush would affect Roe and who later claimed that supporting Roberts or Alito didn't matter. Let this be a lesson to them.

But your analysis is way off. We have to start thinking about a post-Roe reality. The repeal of Roe will not necessarily affect very much. In fact, I compare the issue to the Death Penalty debate of the 60s and 70s. Back in the 60s, people were having second thoughts on the death penalty. Depending on the poll question, about half the country supported banning it (much like with abortion today).

The Supreme Court eventually ruled that the Death Penalty was unconstitutional. The next thing you know the country went into an uproar. That 50% soon became 66% to 70% who supported the death penalty and opposed the courts decision. The ruling was eventually reversed in 1976.

After that, it was up to the individual states to reinstate the death penalty. So in the beginning few states had it. But little by little, it was reinstated through direct government action (passing a law in the state legislature) or through initative or referendum.

If/when Roe is overturned. I have no doubt many governors will attempt to ban it in their respective states. But this will go too far for most people and a huge backlash will ensue.

That's where we step in. Just like the conservatives, we'll have to take the fight to the state legislatures or hold initatives and referendums on the subject. My prediction, is when everything settles down. Fewer than 10 states will actually keep a ban in place. Some states may have limits, but in the end, abortion will be legal in the vast majority of them.

My prediction is that the issue will become so poisonous to Republicans, that just like how liberals today would never advocate abolishing the death penalty - neither will they with abortion. Consider this, even in a conservative state like South Dakota, half of the people polled thought their government went too far.

Given this fact, do you honestly believe that states like Ohio or Pennslyvania will be able to keep the ban in place?

This issue is actually a lose-lose situation for Republicans. Even if they are successful in overturning Roe, not very much will change. People who want abortions, from very conservative states, will just go to states where abortions are offered. People in Utah will go to California. People in South Dakota will go to Minnesota. In the end, nothing much will change, except people will think the Republicans are a bunch of assholes.

Well, let's see: NARAL says that both the governor and the state legislature are anti-choice in Rhode Island, and then notes that it has a laundry list of anti-choice laws on the books, including an abortion ban.

The Tennessee Constitution has been interpreted to prohibit certain abortion restrictions that the United States Constitution hasn't, hence the decision there.

Some interesting coomments, but ultimately not very illuminating because they hinge on 1973 assumptions. Should Roe be overturned, and Republican control of the three branches remain, abortion will be banned nationally by the Congress. The whole "tenth amendment says leave it up to the states" tack by the Right has always been a dishonest dodge. They want to ban it by hook or by crook and if they control Congress they'll do it, damn judicial review.

It would have been an interesting question to pose to Alito, assuming he'd answer it: "Let's assume Roe has been overturned. Does Congress have the authority to ban abortion everywhere?"

I question that reversing Roe would punt the issue back to the states. That'd be the best case; in addition to governors' vetoes, there are also state Supreme Courts which would likely uphold abortion rights in several states, so we may not be even as bad off as Goodman's analysis suggests. But would Congress really stay out of the issue?

We never had a Federal law banning any kind of abortion before Roe, but we have one now: the "partial-birth" abortion ban. And if another Bush appointment overturns Roe, Congress is likely to consider a total ban. Remember, even before the 1994 GOP takeover, both houses had anti-choice majorities.

My hunch: the SD law is running to lose.

Objectively, as noted above, the last thing the GOP wants is to see Roe overturned.

And, if SD-ers were really trying to finesse the retirement (or poisoning, Heaven forfend!) of Justice Stevens, that would be a very silly thing to do.

I suspect the SD bill has one of two purposes: an immediate goosing of the base, followed by a decade of legal mire, and SCOTUS refusing to take the case.

Or to get the law to SCOTUS, in the expectation that it will be struck down, but that the opinions will provide a road map (to coin a phrase) for subsequent bills. (A complete ban gives a tabula rasa on which the court could delineate what it would accept as constitutional. Whereas a ban with exceptions might make it easier to muddy the waters.)

I would defer, of course, to those who inform their hunches with actual expertise in the subject!

Rhode Island voting to ban wouldn't surprise me in the least.  People who don't live in New England usually don't know this, but the most politically active group in RI are socially conservative Portuguese Catholics.  Very strong bloc.

As for Massachusetts, don't forget that the state Democratic Party structure includes many VERY conservative old-school Irish Catholics.  They may be Dems, but progressive and female-friendly they're not.  The idea that MA is ultra-liberal is a joke.