First I read this in a news story about --
Montana NARAL calls the measure "an attempt to redefine when life begins and take away women’s ability to make private medical decisions."
The group says that pro-life advocates support the measure because Montana’s constitution "contains greater protections" for abortion than the U.S. Constitution.
Then I remembered something the "adamantly pro-choice" Alex Hays of the Washington Mainstream Republicans said on David Postman's blog when discussing judicial elections--
No reasonable basis exists for injecting abortion into a debate about state judicial elections...and I hope we can keep it that way. The Washington State Constitution contains the strong protections for privacy rights -- an important fact I learned from Justice Jim Johnson.
I've heard it repeated elsewhere that the Washington state constitution has "greater protection for privacy" than the U.S. Constitution.
What these statements seem to be saying to me is that with abortion regulation being thrown back to the states, the abortion lobby and their friends are beginning to make the argument that state constitutions forbid any regulation of abortion.
Is this a strategy to try and build a wall around the "right to abortion" at the state level?