Bar Rescinds Pro-Choice Position : Abortion: The lawyers' association votes to remain neutral on the issue after hundreds of members dropped out of the group.

Bar Rescinds Pro-Choice Position : Abortion: The lawyers’ association votes to remain neutral on the issue after hundreds of members dropped out of the group.

L.A. Times Archives

Aug. 8, 1990 12 AM PT

From United Press International

CHICAGO — The American Bar Assn.’s House of Delegates narrowly voted today to rescind its pro-choice abortion stance and adopt a neutral position on the issue.

After nearly two hours of debate, the delegates voted 200 to 188 to remain neutral on abortion, affirming an 885-837 vote taken Monday by the ABA General Assembly.

The neutrality position now becomes ABA policy.

The vote followed hints from the Bush Administration that the ABA’s influence in Washington would dwindle unless it reversed its pro-choice stance. Atty. Gen. Dick Thornburgh told the lawyers’ group that the Administration might pay less attention to ABA judge ratings if the pro-choice stance was not rescinded.

“Choosing sides is unnecessary and harmful to the association as a whole,” said Charles Weiss of St. Louis at the opening of today’s debate.

“While we in the past have taken stands on controversial issues, none have struck such a deep cord as (the abortion stand).”

Weiss said rescinding the policy “is the right thing to do. It is in the best interest of the association as a whole. It will allow many of our colleagues to remain a part of us.”

Shortly after the ABA adopted its pro-choice stance in February, hundreds of its 360,000 members dropped out of the group. The ABA Board of Governors previously recommended scrapping the pro-choice position.

Abortion rights activists have spent the week lobbying to defeat the neutrality resolution.

Gloria Allred, the Los Angeles attorney representing Norma McCorvey, the Jane Roe of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that granted women the right to an abortion, said those supporting neutrality are just trying to “neutralize the power and the influence of the ABA.”

“I don’t think the ABA should be neutral on an issue of such import, such significance,” she said. “And, really, to be neutral, I think, is to buy into the anti-choice position, and that’s why we’re opposed to this so-called position of neutrality.”