Indianapolis ? Taking direct aim at Roe v. Wade, lawmakers from several states are proposing broad restrictions on abortion, with the goal of forcing the U.S. Supreme Court – soon to include two new justices – to revisit the landmark ruling issued 33 years ago today. The bill under consideration here in Indiana would ban all abortions, except when continuing the pregnancy would put the woman’s life or physical health in danger of “substantial permanent impairment.” Similar legislation is pending in Ohio, Georgia and Tennessee.

The bills are in direct conflict with the Supreme Court’s 1973 rulings establishing abortion as a constitutional right. Roe v. Wade and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton, asserted that doctors may consider “all factors … relevant to the well-being of the patient,” including emotional and psychological health.

In the years since, states have adopted a variety of laws designed to restrict access to abortion or force women to think through alternatives. Those efforts are expected to continue this year; many states are considering proposals to impose new licensing standards on abortion clinics, or to require women seeking abortion first to view ultrasound images of their fetus and discuss with a counselor the pain a fetus might feel during the procedure.

More than 50 such bills were passed in 2005 – twice as many as in 2004, according to the abortion-rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America.

Monica Salinas, left, and Janet Geraty, center, join thousands of abortion opponents gathered Saturday in San Francisco. The protesters gathered to protest the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

Increasingly, lawmakers opposed to abortion are seeking bolder measures.

Republican Rep. Troy Woodruff, serving his first term in the Indiana Legislature, wrote House Bill 1096 knowing it would conflict with Roe v. Wade. That was precisely his point: He wants his ban appealed to the Supreme Court, in hopes that the justices will overturn Roe and give states the power to make abortion a crime.

“On an issue that’s this personal, it should be decided as local as possible,” Woodruff said. “We either want these procedures, or we don’t. … And I don’t.”

The debate unfolds as the Senate prepares to vote on Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. As a young lawyer, Alito wrote that he wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade. In his confirmation hearings last week, he declined to call the case “settled law,” suggesting that he might be willing to reverse or modify it.