Thanks to pro-life state legislatures and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas's perceptive writings, the good news is that the hiatus in public awareness is beginning to fade.
In his opinion, Thomas believes that the subject of "selective" abortion bans requires "further percolation" in lower courts. However, he warns that the Supreme Court may soon have to decide whether legislation like Indiana's are constitutional, given the "potential for abortion to become a tool of eugenic manipulation." He seemed to be indicating that he would support such legislation.
Much of Thomas's viewpoint is an attack on the current birth control campaign, which he claims has unsettling ties to the eugenics movement of the 20th century. He is particularly harsh on Margaret Sanger, a proponent of birth control who believes it "opens the way to the eugenist."
Thomas's use of Sanger to oppose "eugenic" abortion is hampered by the fact that, as Thomas concedes, Sanger talked about birth control, not abortion. (Both abortion and infanticide were labeled as "horrors" by her.)