Product details

This case focuses on the personal and political choices faced by an important South Dakota state senator when legislation that would dramatically curtail the right to abortion is introduced in that state. State Senator Scott Heidepriem, chair of the state senate''s Judiciary Committee, is not at all confused about his own position on the bill. For an array of reasons, including some based in his own family, he is firmly "pro-choice." But as a key legislative gatekeeper, Heidepriem must decide if and how to use his position to influence the outcome of the legislative process, keeping in mind the public perception of fairness and the way in which "process" arguments can influence votes. The case is enlivened by Heidepriem''s knowledge that his pro-choice position is directly at odds with that of the vast majority of the voters who elected him, thus raising, in a contemporary setting, the most basic questions about the role of elected representatives in a democracy.