I’ve criticized the press many times for misreporting the facts about the scope and practical effects of Roe v. Wade. So it’s only fair to note that David Savage, in the L. A. Times, gets the story right.

(I would make only one qualification to that judgment. He writes, “In a Gallup poll in May . . . only 23% of those surveyed said abortion should be “legal under any circumstances,” the rule set by Roe vs. Wade.” Then, in a misguided attempt at evenhandedness, he adds, “Only 22% said abortion should be ‘illegal in all circumstances,’ the rule that could take effect in many states if the Supreme Court were to overturn Roe vs. Wade.” I don’t think there is a state in the union that would enact that rule, which appears on its face to exclude even abortions to save a woman’s life. A few states would have general bans on abortion with rape, incest, and life-of-the-mother exceptions. Presumably some people who support that policy were among the 53 percent who told Gallup they thought abortion should be “legal only under certain circumstances.”)