Curtailing of Abortion Rights Seen : Reproduction: Restriction opponents say Supreme Court ruling expected Monday is certain to impose new limits. They contend California will not be immune from decision.

Abortion rights advocates including U.S. Senate nominee Barbara Boxer and actress Holly Hunter said Saturday they fear that a woman’s unrestricted right to abortion--guaranteed by Roe vs. Wade since 1973--will be doomed by a U.S. Supreme Court decision expected Monday.

They also disputed the common perception that the availability of abortion in California will not be affected by such a ruling. Although California has one of the nation’s most liberal abortion laws, pending legal action could erode the state constitutional foundation for unrestricted abortion, they said.

Nationally, women “will lose the right to choice” without congressional action, said Boxer, a Democratic congresswoman from Marin County and her party’s nominee to succeed Sen. Alan Cranston.

“The court is gone” as a protector of abortion rights, Boxer added in an address to a luncheon sponsored by the California Abortion Rights Action League at the Beverly Hilton Hotel. “Whatever happens on Monday, we know it is going to be a narrowing of our rights. And frankly, they can’t be narrowed any more.”

Opponents of abortion argue that the restrictions contained in the Pennsylvania law being scrutinized by the Supreme Court would not substantially undermine a woman’s right to an abortion. So long as the conditions are met, the law would not prevent any woman who desired an abortion from getting one, they contend.

At the luncheon Saturday, Hunter urged the 600 women and a scattering of men to rally behind CARAL as a means of electing legislators this fall who favor abortion rights, and to lobby for the passage of laws that guarantee a woman’s right to get an abortion.

“I feel like we’re being told to cease having vision and having hope,” Hunter said. “We’re being told to be mute. We’re being told to go to sleep and don’t dream. I just feel like somebody wants to render me invisible.”

She added: “I want to be able to hope that we are not going to just sit back and passively let this freedom slip away from us. I don’t want to be apathetic. I want us to take action.”

The court is expected to announce a decision Monday on the constitutionality of a Pennsylvania law that puts several conditions on a woman’s right to an abortion. The conditions include making the woman discuss abortion with a doctor and then making her wait 24 hours after the discussion before the abortion can be performed. The law also requires that the woman’s husband be notified, if he is the father of the child; unmarried women need not notify the father. In the case of minors, parental notification would be required.

Many legal experts doubt that the court will use the Pennsylvania case to explicitly overturn the Roe vs. Wade ruling, which guarantees abortion rights in most cases. But they believe that the court may uphold a state’s right to impose some or all of the law’s restrictions.

Robin Schneider, CARAL associate director, said Saturday that the imposition of any restrictions will allow state legislatures to impose any conditions on abortions they desire, including a total ban.

“We do not expect Roe vs. Wade to last through Monday,” Schneider said, adding that at least 13 state legislatures are prepared to pass abortion bans as soon as the Supreme Court acts.

“No state, including California, is immune from this tragedy,” Schneider added.

Boxer is one of those supporting the Freedom of Choice Act in Congress. Some Washington sources have said that a Supreme Court decision that falls short of outright nullification of Roe vs. Wade could dampen the sense of urgency behind passage of the congressional act.

In any event, President Bush most likely would veto such a bill and Congress would not be able to override the veto, Schneider said. She urged members to work to elect abortion rights advocates to Congress this fall to bolster forces there.

Schneider and state Sen. Lucy Killea (I-San Diego) said the right to abortion in California is more seriously at risk than many believe. The margin of legislators in the Assembly and Senate who favor abortion rights is slim, they said.

A California Superior Court has overturned a 1987 California law requiring unwed minors to get parental consent or a court order before having an abortion, but Schneider said the decision probably will be appealed and could reach the state Supreme Court.

The court has become far more conservative since its last major decision affecting abortion rights, she added.

“Here in the state of California, we tend to be complacent because of the privacy provision in the state Constitution,” said Killea, whose campaign for the state Senate was fought largely on the issue of abortion.

Killea said it is important that the Legislature consider new legislation to guarantee women the right to an abortion in California.

“As long as we have a pro-choice governor, we really have to get moving on it,” she said, referring to Republican Gov. Pete Wilson.

Another speaker, Los Angeles attorney and activist Lisa Specht, said: “In California, we have been living under a false sense of freedom.”

Abortion also is expected to be a major issue in Boxer’s U.S. Senate campaign against Republican nominee Bruce Herschensohn, who believes Roe vs. Wade should be overturned.

Boxer said Saturday that the issue is not abortion itself, adding: “This is about respect. This is about dignity. And most of all, this is about freedom. . . . That (abortion) is a personal, private decision. It’s about freedom-fighting.”

A “Day of Decision” rally will be sponsored by the Greater Los Angeles Coalition for Reproductive Freedom from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. Monday at Main and Temple streets if the decision is handed down then, or on whatever day this week that the court acts.