South Dakota Moves To Legalize Killing Abortion Providers

A law under consideration in South Dakota would expand the definition of "justifiable homicide" to include killings that are intended to prevent harm to a fetus—a move that could make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions. The Republican-backed legislation, House Bill 1171, has passed out of committee on a nine-to-three party-line vote, and is expected to face a floor vote in the state's GOP-dominated House of Representatives soon. Full Story »

Posted by Jon Mitchell - via David Corn, Dave Weigel, Peter Daou, Memeorandum, Slatest, Mother Jones, David K. Miller (t), Ray Nichols (t), Ron Steffens (t), Randy Benson (t)
Tags Help
Member Tags: south dakota, crime and justice, reproductive rights, Top Stories
Stats Help
# Diggs: 36 (as of 2011-02-17)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Jon Mitchell - Feb 15, 2011 - 4:21 AM PST
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Jon Mitchell - Feb 15, 2011 - 9:55 AM PST
Jon Mitchell
3.5
by Jon Mitchell - Feb. 15, 2011

I'll begin by saying that this article displays great journalistic integrity, offering corrective updates with lots of linked explanations. It also provides good context, which is very helpful in an article that requires some understanding of South Dakota state-level politics. However, I think Mother Jones is grasping at straws trying to give the story simple shock value, whereas the legal facts are much more subtle. This bill is shifting shape under scrutiny, and I think this author should do a better job of employing legal experts to demonstrate exactly what it does and does not do.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Gin Ferrara
3.4
by Gin Ferrara - Feb. 15, 2011

While the writer did a good job of sourcing and updating the article with new information, I am still unclear as to the actual bills' content, and find the distinction of legal abortions vs. illegal acts confusing. There is definitely an attempt to shock us with the title, but I agree with Jon, there are more nuances here.

See Full Review » (10 answers)
Fred Gatlin
4.2
by Fred Gatlin - Feb. 15, 2011

This is a thorough review of South Dakota bill. With all concerns of state income and needed legislation many are still taking time to get legislation like this bill. Yes, to does take your breath away.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Dwight Rousu
4.6
by Dwight Rousu - Feb. 15, 2011

The article catches some of the outrage at this bill, and states the disingenuous denial of the bill sponsor without comment.

Just good old law and order repugnantcans bypassing democracy to legalize terrorism in order to enforce putting the government in charge of the human choice of whether to bring children into the world.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Don Bertschman
4.1
by Don Bertschman - Feb. 15, 2011
See Full Review » (18 answers)
Randy Morrow
4.1
by Randy Morrow - Feb. 15, 2011

The measure could have major implications if a “misguided extremist invokes this ‘self-defense’ statute to justify the murder of a doctor, nurse or ... More »

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Megan Neider
4.0
by Megan Neider - Feb. 15, 2011

The story focuses on differences in political party preferences, or pro life/pro choice preferences. It is unclear what fault line these might fall under, or which should be included, since these opinions can vary widely even within the same racial, socioeconomic, or geographical region.

See Full Review » (4 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.9

Good
from 9 reviews (55% confidence)
Quality
3.9
Facts
3.9
Fairness
3.7
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Sourcing
3.9
Style
3.7
Accuracy
4.0
Balance
3.0
Context
4.0
Depth
4.0
Enterprise
4.3
Expertise
4.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
4.1
Transparency
4.0
Responsibility
3.0
Popularity
3.8
Recommendation
3.8
Credibility
4.2
# Reviews
4.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!