So... USAToday popped up with this:

The Constitution, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, also opposes a ban. The court has repeatedly said abortion is a private matter, subject only to reasonable regulation.

How could it say otherwise? No matter how sincere the beliefs of abortion opponents, a ban is, in the end, an attempt to impose one group's faith on others.

So opponents have settled instead for back-door tactics: mandatory waiting periods, burdensome regulations, prescribing what doctors can or can't tell patients, and requiring minors to obtain parental consent.

Some can be viewed as reasonable compromise on a tough issue, but the intent is to add so many hurdles that abortion is unattainable, particularly in combination with harassment of doctors and patients. In South Dakota, this is so effective that the state has just one abortion clinic, staffed by outsiders.

Now, emboldened by the appointment of two presumed allies to the Supreme Court, activists are stripping the veneer away.

What is the patriarchy? It's a man's world.
[Luke Murphy]

While South Dakota is the first state to attempt such a sweeping ban on abortion in more than a decade, at least 15 other states '