On March 29, the trial in Carhart v. Ashcroft will begin. The Center for Reproductive Rights brings this civil rights lawsuit in federal court in Lincoln, Nebraska, on behalf of four doctors challenging the constitutionality of the federal "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003." The lawsuit contends that the federal ban is unconstitutional because it would ban abortions as early as 12-15 weeks in pregnancy, and would outlaw a range of safe abortions in the second trimester. The law also fails to safeguard women because it contains no exception for a woman's health.

Statement by Nancy Northup, President, Center for Reproductive Rights

"Four years ago, the Center for Reproductive Rights fought all the way to the Supreme Court to win a landmark ruling striking down a Nebraska abortion ban nearly identical to the federal abortion ban we challenge today. In that case, Stenberg v. Carhart, we represented LeRoy Carhart, the brave physician who is the lead plaintiff in this case.

Dr. Carhart is back in court because the 'Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003' has the same flaws as the Nebraska law the Supreme Court found unconstitutional. The federal law would criminalize abortions as early as 12 to 15 weeks in pregnancy. It has nothing to do with 'late-term' abortions.

Third-trimester abortions are already banned in 40 states. The federal abortion ban does not use medical definitions or describe a single procedure. Rather, it is written so broadly that it covers steps that doctors routinely take in performing abortions in the second trimester. And the federal abortion ban has no exception for the health of the woman.

Politicians have again come between Dr. Carhart and his patients, preventing him from giving them the best and safest medical care. That is why other doctors have joined him, and why major medical organizations - including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - oppose the federal abortion ban.

If this law were in effect, the considerable investigative power and prosecutorial resources of the federal criminal justice system would bear down on these doctors and invade their patients' privacy. FBI agents and U.S. Attorneys across the nation would have the full arsenal of law enforcement methods to enforce the abortion ban, including compelling testimony in the grand jury, using nationwide subpoena power to obtain medical records, and executing search warrants of doctors' offices.

Dr. Carhart and other doctors in this case practice medicine in the heartland of America, in places such as Nebraska and Iowa, where 95% of counties have no abortion provider. If allowed to go into effect, the federal abortion ban would impose another devastating barrier to the delivery of reproductive health care for women.

Dr. Carhart shouldn't have to be back in court, fighting the same fight all over again. Four years ago, the Supreme Court held that 'the findings and evidence support Dr. Carhart.' Nothing has changed since then, except a Congress and President bent on unraveling Roe v. Wade."