During a discussion about the possible consequences of abortion bans, Newsradio 850 KOA host “Gunny” Bob Newman stated on his July 20 show that South Dakota passed an anti-abortion law “that is going through the challenge system.” However, that issue in fact was resolved on November 7, 2006, when South Dakota voters passed a referendum to repeal the measure to which he presumably referred, an anti-abortion law that the state had enacted on March 6, 2006. Further, a South Dakota Senate committee this year rejected an anti-abortion bill similar to the 2006 law.

Newman was disputing a caller's contention that an abortion ban would lead to women undergoing unsafe illegal abortion procedures.

From the July 20 broadcast of Newsradio 850 KOA's The Gunny Bob Show:

NEWMAN: Well, I'm anti-abortion on convenience sake.

CALLER: OK, well, yeah. But --

NEWMAN: You know, because frankly, I mean, [caller], I look at it this way: a woman, you know, she's out, you know, she has unprotected sex, or she's promiscuous, or what have you. She gets pregnant; she's not married. She, she gets pregnant, and she doesn't feel like being pregnant right now. And so, you know, she's three, four months pregnant, she says, “Well, you know, gosh, I really -- this is very inconvenient for me. I'm going to kill this kid.”

CALLER: Well then, she's going to end up doing something very stupid, like using a coat hanger or something --

NEWMAN: I --

CALLER: -- because this is illegal.

NEWMAN: It's -- that's, it's not true anymore. And here's why, [caller] --

CALLER: It's been done, though. It has been done before.

NEWMAN: I know, but not anymore. I know, but listen, [caller]. I don't think it would be done very much anymore because you can go to -- you can go to another state; you can go to Canada; you can go to Mexico and, and have the abortion. That's what a lot of people are doing in South Dakota because they passed a law up there that is going through the challenge system. And if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant she just leaves the state; she can go next door into Minnesota and have the abortion. Doesn't have to use a coat hanger.

Newman presumably was referring to South Dakota House Bill 1215, the South Dakota Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act. As The New York Times reported upon HB 1215's enactment on March 6, 2006, the bill was designed to set up a legal challenge to the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion, and its effective date likely would be delayed pending court challenges:

The governor of South Dakota, Mike Rounds, signed today a bill intended to ban most abortions in the state and to set up a challenge to the United States Supreme Court decision, handed down in 1973, that legalized abortion in all states.

The law would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman's life, with no exception for cases of rape or incest. Planned Parenthood, which operates the state's only abortion clinic, has pledged to challenge the law in court.

Acknowledging that the law is a direct challenge to the 1973 Supreme Court ruling known as Roe V. Wade, Mr. Rounds said the law's effective date in July was likely to be delayed by a court challenge.

“That challenge will likely take years to be settled and it may ultimately be decided by the United States Supreme Court,” Governor Rounds said in a statement posted on the state's Web site. “Our existing laws regulating abortions will remain in effect.”

However, opponents of the law successfully petitioned to have HB 1215 placed on the 2006 ballot as a referred measure and, as the Associated Press reported on November 8, 2006, South Dakota voters rejected the abortion ban:

A ballot measure that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota was rejected on Tuesday.

With 59% of the precincts reporting, opponents of the ban had 55%, or 98,182 votes, to the supporters' 45%, or 79,444 votes.

Jan Nicolay, leader of the group seeking to reject the measure, said the returns indicate that voters understood that the proposed law was too extreme because it did not include exceptions for rape, incest or the health of a pregnant woman.

[...]

The Legislature passed the law last winter in an attempt to prompt a court challenge aimed at getting the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the nation.

Instead of filing a lawsuit, however, opponents gathered petition signatures to place the measure on the general election ballot for a statewide vote.

Furthermore, according to a February 22 news brief (accessed through the Nexis database) in the St. Paul Pioneer Press, “A South Dakota bill to ban most abortions in a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade appeared dead Wednesday after a state Senate committee rejected it. The surprising 8-1 vote marked the third time in four years that measures to bar abortion in South Dakota were defeated.” The brief continued:

The Legislature passed an even stricter ban last year, but it was rejected by the voters in November. Supporters had hoped to use the new law to prompt the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider its 1973 ruling declaring the right to an abortion. Opponents argued the bill was so plainly unconstitutional the court probably wouldn't even consider the case. State Rep. Gordon Howie, the bill's sponsor, said he would try to bring the bill to the full Senate anyway. But several senators said there were probably not enough votes to revive the bill.