Skip to comments.Texas Judge Strikes Down Pro-Life Law That Closed Abortion Clinics
Posted on 09/01/2014 9:28:57 AM PDT by Morgana
A Texas judge has blocked a pro-life law credited with closing multiple abortion clinics and cutting abortions 13 percent, saving an estimated 9,900 babies from abortion.
The legislation, House Bill 2 (HB2), requires abortion facilities to meet the same safety standards of other Ambulatory Surgical Centers in the state, ensures that abortionists have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and bans painful late abortions on fully formed babies.
texas17Planned Parenthood did not challenge the laws prohibition on abortions that take place at 20 weeks or later, a provision based on evidence that demonstrates the baby can feel pain at that stage. Pro-life Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed the omnibus HB 2 bill into law in July 2013.
The admitting privileges portion of the law was the portion responsible for closing abortion clinics and, because so many shut down or stopped doing abortions, Judge Lee Yeakel claimed that constituted an undue burden on women.
The ambulatory-surgical-center requirement is unconstitutional because it imposes an undue burden on the right of women throughout Texas to seek a previability abortion, Yeakel ruled.
AP reported that Yeakel also ordered the McAllen and El Paso areas to be exempted from a separate provision of the law requiring abortion doctors to obtain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital bhecause few abortion clinics are in that area and women would have to drive far to get to another one.
Attorney General Greg Abbott, who is pro-life, will appeal the decision.
In March, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling upholding the Texas law Wendy Davis opposed that was responsible for closing abortion clinics in the Lone Star State. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Lee Yeakel of the Western District Court in Austin and restored key portions of a pro-life law.
In their decision, the appeals court upheld sections of the law that require abortionists hold admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, and that the dangerous RU-486 abortion drug be administered according to FDA procedure.
The judges wrote, The district court held that parts of both provisions were unconstitutional and granted, in substantial part, the requested injunctive relief. A motions panel of this court granted a stay pending appeal, and the Supreme Court upheld the stay. We conclude that both of the challenged provisions are constitutional and, therefore, reverse and render judgment, with one exception, for the State.
Abortion clinics appealed that decision to the Supreme Court and Justice Scalia issued a ruling saying the high court would not stop the law while the case continued.
That kicked the lawsuit abortion advocates filed against the law back to Judge Yeakel, who ruled today on the admitting privileges portion of the law and blocked it from going into effect as planned next week.
Although pro-life advocates hailed the law as a decision for womens health, by ensuring abortion practitioner hold the same admitting privileges at local hospitals as legitimate doctors do, that shut down or temporarily closed abortion doctors who could not meet that standard.
Had the law been upheld, abortion activists feared Texas may have only seven abortion clinics instead of 19.
When the panel reviewed the bill, they found that the state acted within its prerogative to regulate the medical profession by heeding these patient-centered concerns and requiring abortion practitioners to obtain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. The state also found that it would be safer for patients to drive further to receive an abortion at a surgical facility with a credentialed and privileged physician than to seek an abortion at a nearby, substandard clinic. The bottom line is women deserve better than substandard care.
Additionally the opinion written by Judge Edith Jones explained why admitting privileges are necessary. She said, Requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges would also promote the continuity of care in all cases, reducing the risk of injury caused by miscommunication and misdiagnosis when a patient is transferred from one health care provider to another.
Judge Jones also noted that Planned Parenthood conceded that at least 210 women in Texas annually must be hospitalized after seeking an abortion.
Abortion is not a safe medical procedure.
Although abortion proponents argue that having an abortion is like having a tooth extracted, forty-two years of choice has not served women well. From botched abortions and injured women, to decades of psychological pain, infertility, and higher chances of developing breast cancer, women deserve to know the truth about the so-called five-minute, painless abortion.
This legislation acknowledges the fact that abortion hurts women and mandates that the state implements measures to ensure that women are given the highest standard of care possible. This is especially necessary in scenarios where women experience complications from abortion, such as hemorrhage, uterine perforation, or infection from an incomplete abortion. In the past, the delay in care has caused women unnecessary trauma, injury, and even death.
For example, a Chicago woman died at a Planned Parenthood facility after a botched second trimester abortion because she did not receive immediate care after an abortionist perforated her uterus.
Keep enforcing it anyway. The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment protect laws like this.
So what would happen if Texas just decided to enforce the law anywise, essentially telling the judge to stuff it?
BTW...this moron is a George W. nominee!
F'n Texas politics! This clown was recommended to Bush by Texas U.S. Senators Kay Bailey Worthless and John Cornhole.
Abortion alley has taken over our health industry through Obamacare.
Tell the judge to shove it, come on and enforce it, and drop the remains in his lawn.
So VERY sick of judges ignoring the Constitution.
> Pro-life Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed the omnibus HB 2 bill into law in July 2013.
The judge is pro-botched abortions then.
That is what Texas should do.
Then any law anywhere is subject to your line. Frustration is at a maximum but your solution leads to disaster.
“210” hospitalized annually in Texas after abortions! One wonders what the national figure is? What a media cover-up. And Pro-Lifers get accused of not caring about women’s “health” and engaging in a “war on women”.
Undue burden is just a judges discuses for the fact that they don’t like a particular act, as pretty much every liberal act is designed to impose an undue burden upon some minority in the enjoyment of some natural liberty. Normally that minority in their mind at least is the wealthy, and that activity is economic.
In reality that minority is generally the poor, as wealthy industry simply collect taxes for the Government, not pay them. Liberals just like shifting the imedeadnt tax burden on them because then they get the blaim for price increases instead of the poor who invariably suffer the most from them.
I love watching the left squeal on this one. They’re the ones who like to try to present abortion as just another medical procedure - but then they cry foul when someone tries to regulate it as such.
We need to just leave the union.
+1. I’d vote for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.