"Partial Birth Abortion" Decision In San Francisco

Today, a federal judge in San Francisco has declared the "partial-birth abortion" ban unconstitutional (via Drudge):

"The act poses an undue burden on a woman's right to choose an abortion," the judge wrote....In her ruling, the judge said it was "grossly misleading and inaccurate" to suggest the banned procedure verges on infanticide.

Regardless of today's ruling, I still don't think politicians or judges should decide how medical procedures are performed.

Here are a couple of quotes from ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) on "partial-birth abortion" (emphasis added):

Bills that frequently use terms -- such as "partial birth abortion" -- that are not recognized by the very constituency (physicians) whose conduct the law would criminalize, and that purport to address a single procedure yet describe elements of other procedures used in obstetrics and gynecology would not meet the Court's test.

...

The medical misinformation currently circulating in political discussions of abortion procedures only reinforces ACOG's position: in the individual circumstances of each particular medical case, the patient and physician -- not legislators -- are the appropriate parties to determine the best method of treatment.

Once again, I'm in complete agreement with ACOG.

UPDATE: More on today's decision from ampersand.

UPDATE : On a related note, a legal discussion-logical argument combo of Roe v. Wade from Radgeek. (via Alas, a Blog).