BILL McCOSHEN, SCOTT'S ROSS, THANK YOU.

TURNING TO OUR ABORTION SERIES, THE WISCONSIN LAWS RELATING TO ABORTION ARE UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE, ACCORDING TO THREE PHYSICIAN INTERVENERS, NAMED IN THE COMPLEX LAWSUIT CHALLENGING WISCONSIN'S 1849 LAW ON ABORTION.

THE LAWSUIT INITIALLY BROUGHT BY STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL JOSH KAUL LAST YEAR NAMES THREE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AS DEFENDANTS BECAUSE THERE WERE PLANNED PARENTHOOD CLINICS PERFORMING ABORTIONS IN THEIR COUNTIES.

THEY ARE DANE COUNTY D.A.

ISMAEL OZANNE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY D.A.

JOHN CHISEL HOLY AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTY JOE UMAR.

OF THE THREE, ONLY SHEBOYGAN COUNTY YOU ARE MAN CAN I SAID HE WOULD PROSECUTE PHYSICIANS IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW.

THE LAWSUIT ALLEGES THE PHYSICIANS FEAR CRIMINAL CHARGES AND HAVE HAD TO ALTER HOW CARE IS PROVIDED TO THEIR PATIENTS.

URMANSKI ARGUES THE LAWSUIT IS AN ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN FROM THIS COURT WHAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS REFUSED TO DO AND ALSO SAYS, ALTHOUGH THE INTERVENERS RAISED CONCERNS REGARDING HOW THE 1849 LAW MAY APPLY TO ABORTIONS THEY MAY NEED TO PERFORM AS PART OF THEIR CARE OF PREGNANT PATIENTS, THEY CAN NOT MEET NEAR BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THAT THE 1849 LAW CANNOT CONSTITUTIONALLY BE APPLIED TO ANY ABORTION.

ONE COULD, FOR EXAMPLE, APPLY THE 1849 LAW TO PROHIBIT AN ELECTIVE ABORTION ON A HEALTHY MOTHER OF A 6- TO 8-WEEK-OLD UNBORN CHILD WITHOUT IMPLICATING ANY OF THE INTERVENERS' CONCERNS IN THEIR COMPLAINT.

NEITHER D.A.

URMANSKI NOR HIS