Both pro-life and pro-choice advocates are claiming victory after last week's injunction against two provisions of the new abortion legislation .

If the federal injunction on the two provisions had not occurred, starting today a woman would have been required to notify her husband of her decision to have an abortion and wait 24 hours before obtaining one.

Restrictions on abortions performed because of the fetus' sex and after 24 weeks of pregnancy have not been challenged in court because it is hard to find women who will be affected by them, said Erik Johnke, public affairs specialist for Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania .

"We object to those provisions just as strongly as we object to the three that were challenged," Johnke said.

One of the lawyers on the case, Linda Wharton of the Women's Law Project of Philadelphia, said she expects the case to come to trial within three or four months.

The Women's Law Project of Philadelphia and the American Civil Liberties Union is representing Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Philadelphia and other abortion providers throughout the state in the lawsuit.

If any woman is found who will not be able to obtain an abortion because of today's restrictions she will be added to the suit, Wharton said.

The law's author, Rep. Stephen Freind, R-Delaware, said Planned Parenthood did not litigate the remaining provisions because they would directly challenge the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision. However, Freind said he believes every provision in his bill could challenge the heart of the 1973 decision.

"We're in a win-win situation," he said.

Taking the case to the courts, Friend said, can only help the pro- life cause. If the state wins the case, all provisions of the law will go into effect; if it loses, the state will appeal and U.S. Supreme Court will have an opportunity to overturn Roe vs. Wade, he said.

The state representative also said he was pleased with an extended injunction against an earlier Pennsylvania abortion law, which would require minors to obtain parental consent for abortion. Under this combined injunction, the two cases will be tried earlier and perhaps by mid-May, he said.

"The injunction itself doesn't really attack the meat of the law. The pro-choice people are being prematurely excited about this," said Leah Sterling, secretary of the Pennsylvania Intercollegiate Federation for Life.

Sterling said the suit may give the U.S. Supreme Court the chance to rethink the principle of Roe vs. Wade.

"It stands for abortion on demand for any woman, for any reason and that's wrong," Sterling said.

Leeanne Simon, spokeswoman for Centre Countians for Choice, said she does not think the Supreme Court will overturn Roe vs. Wade if the decision goes that far.

The court has had many opportunities to do this in the past and has not, she said.