As we commemorate the 29th Anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade and open a new session of Congress, much has changed with respect to the national agenda. Few would dispute that the events of September 11 have radically altered priorities in Washington. But one thing hasn't changed: the determination of anti-choice legislators to enact far-reaching restrictions on the right to choose.

Today, anti-choice forces hold the balance of power in Congress and are backed by the full muscle of a White House that is vehemently opposed to reproductive freedom. Nearly 30 years after we secured the right to choose, we therefore continue to battle for its survival in Congress. Prior to September 11, the House had already passed one significant anti-choice measure -- The Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which would elevate the fetus to the status of legal personhood for the first time in federal law. And it was well on its way to passing another, the Teen Endangerment Act, which would constitute the most serious restriction on minors' rights to choose abortion ever enacted by Congress. Only the tragic events of September 11 forestalled further action on these dangerous bills. With the passage of time, we fully expect anti-choice legislators to return to their pre-September 11 agenda.

Here are some of the most pernicious measures we anticipate fighting this session:

Teen Endangerment Act

The Teen Endangerment Act (called the "Child Custody Protection Act" by its proponents) would make it a federal crime for any person other than a parent to transport a minor across state lines for an abortion unless the minor had already fulfilled the requirements of her home state's parental involvement law. This bill is not only unconstitutional; it is also harmful to minors.

The bill would endanger the health of pregnant teens by discouraging them from turning to trusted adults for help, and would instead force them to travel alone if they sought care out of state. Family communication simply cannot be legislated. While studies have found that a majority of young women who are pregnant and seeking an abortion already choose to involve a parent in their decision, other teens have valid reasons for not doing so. One third of teenagers who do not tell their parents about a pregnancy have already been the victims of family violence -- physical, emotional, and sexual abuse -- and fear it will recur.

The last two Congresses considered this dangerous bill, which passed the House in 1999, despite a threatened veto from President Clinton. The bill was scheduled for action in the House on September 11, 2001, but consideration of the measure was postponed. We expect it to come up again in the coming months and will need to mobilize vocal opposition to defeat it.

Click here for more information on this bill and to find out how you can help: http://archive.aclu.org/action/custody107.html

Bill to Elevate Fetal Rights

Called the "Unborn Victims of Violence Act" by its sponsors, this bill would grant independent legal status to a fetus under federal law by making it a crime for an individual to cause the death of or injury to a "child in utero" at any stage of development. This legislation would be the first federal law to recognize a fetus as an independent victim of a crime, with legal rights distinct from those of the pregnant woman who has been harmed by a violent act. It would thus dramatically alter the existing legal framework by elevating the fetus to an unprecedented status in federal law, undermining the very foundation of the right to choose.

The bill passed the House last April, with supporters rejecting alternative approaches that would have protected pregnant women from violence and appropriately punished violent offenders without undermining reproductive freedom. We expect the bill's proponents to attempt to push for passage in the Senate during this session. Given President Bush's stated support for the measure, the bill will become law unless we defeat it in the Senate.

Click here for more information on this bill and to take action: http://archive.aclu.org/action/antichoice107.html

Attacks on Family Planning

Enacted more than 30 years ago, Title X is the only federal program devoted solely to providing family planning services nationwide, mostly to poor or low-income women. Last fall, anti-choice legislators began a frontal assault on this program with an amendment sponsored by Representative David Vitter (R-LA) that would prohibit any organization from receiving Title X funding if that organization uses non-Title X resources -- including private funds -- to provide abortion services to its clients. (By statute, Title X funds have never been used and cannot be used to provide abortions.) This amendment is both unwise as a matter of public health policy and unconstitutional as a matter of law.

The Vitter Amendment jeopardizes a primary funding source for the most trusted and experienced reproductive health care providers, some of whom have been providing reproductive health services for decades. While Title X funds cannot be used for abortions, many hospitals and clinics that received these funds provide abortion services using other funding sources. In many jurisdictions, there are no other health care providers who would be able to fill the void created by the termination of contracts with these existing family planning providers. If enacted, this provision could thus leave women with nowhere to go for the contraceptive services they need to avoid unintended pregnancy, as well as for breast and cervical cancer screening, testing for HIV and other STDs, and other crucial preventive health care.

The provision also improperly conditions the receipt of federal funding on an organization's agreement to forego the exercise of a constitutionally protected right. It automatically disqualifies from Title X eligibility any organization that provides abortions using wholly other resources. The Supreme Court has clearly held that such a prohibition is an unconstitutional condition on non-federal dollars.

Although expected last session, introduction of the Vitter Amendment was ultimately postponed. We expect it to be considered this session.

Click here for more information on this provision: http://archive.aclu.org/congress/l092801a.html