Skip to comments.Supreme Court Upholds Kentucky Law Letting Women See Ultrasound of Their Baby Before Abortion
Posted on 12/09/2019 8:51:59 AM PST by Morgana
The Supreme Court has upheld a Kentucky law slowing women a chance to see an ultrasound of their unborn baby before having an abortion. Ultrasounds are generally done before abortionist to determine the age of the baby prior to the abortion, but abortion clinics normally dont let women see their baby because they may change their mind after seeing their child.
The nations highest court declined to take up a challenge to the law from abortion activists. The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents Kentuckys only abortion clinic, EMW Womens Surgical Center, had asked the courts to strike it down.
In early 2017 the Kentucky legislature passed the bill and U.S. District Court Judge David Hale struck it down shortly thereafter. Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin appealed Judge Hales ruling.
In gutting the ultrasound law, which passed overwhelmingly, Judge Hale wrote, The court recognizes that states have substantial interests in protecting fetal life and ensuring the psychological well-being and informed decision-making of pregnant women, but added, However, HB 2 does not advance those interests and impermissibly interferes with physicians First Amendment rights.
But the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed and refused to have the entire court reconsider a ruling by a three-judge panel that upheld the law.
Earlier this year, judges, from the 6th Circuit, ruled 2-1 that the law did not violate a doctors First Amendment rights to free speech, writing that the information gleaned from an ultrasound was pertinent to a womans decision-making.
The information conveyed by an ultrasound image, its description, and the audible beating fetal heart gives a patient greater knowledge of the unborn life inside her, wrote John Bush, a nominee of President Trump. This also inherently provides the patient with more knowledge about the effect of an abortion procedure: it shows her what, or whom, she is consenting to terminate.
According to the Associated Press, attorneys from the ACLU, maintained that HB 2 forces abortionists to deliver ideological messages to their patients, even when its against a patients wishes, a violating of the abortionists First Amendment rights.
By contrast, Chad Meredith, an attorney for the state of Kentucky,
said the message isnt ideological but instead delivers pure scientific facts relevant to an abortion procedure. He noted that the lone abortion clinic in Kentucky EMW Womens Surgical Center in Louisville routinely performs ultrasounds before doing abortions.
All that House Bill 2 requires them to do is to turn the monitor around, show it to the patient and say here is what this depicts, he told the court based on an audio recording. This adds absolutely no more than five minutes to the procedure. Theres nothing unreasonable about this.
The law would require abortion center staff to display the ultrasound image for the woman and describe the dimensions of her unborn baby and the presence of internal organs, if seen, according to the Associated Press. The bill includes fines of up to $100,000 for the first offense and $250,000 for subsequent offenses if abortion doctors violate the law by failing to give women the opportunity to see the ultrasound of their unborn child, the report states.
During consideration of the bill, state Sen. Whitney Westerfield, R-Hopkinsville, who sponsored the bill, explained why the measure was so important. He said a friend of his shared her abortion story with him and told him how an abortion clinic nurse refused to let her see her unborn child on the ultrasound screen.
She regrets to this day not being able to see it knowing now, feeling certain, that had she been able to see it, had she been allowed to see it she wouldnt have made the decision that she did, Westerfield said. Regardless of everyones position on abortion in this chamber, I think we can all agree that fewer is better.
In attempt to mock the ultrasound bill, a Kentucky Democratic representative also introduced a bill to require men to swear on the Bible to be faithful to their wives before receiving erectile dysfunction prescriptions.
>> but abortion clinics normally dont let women see their baby because they may change their mind after seeing their child.
A friend of mine works for an organization that offers counseling and ultra sound pictures of your baby if you’re considering an abortion.
Literally 70% of these women decide against abortion when allowed to see the xray. PP is waaaay against this practice for just that reason.
No mention on how they voted. But I can bet the usual suspects were against it.
Thanks for posting Morgana. life BUMP
“...but abortion clinics normally dont let women see their baby because they may change their mind after seeing their child. “
Need anything more be said about the complete slimes in the ACLU?
Following CW-II, I trust that very very special punishments will be given to these vermin.
What perverted mind came up with this flawed logic?
“clinics normally dont let women see their baby “
Think about that sentence, especially the use of the word “let”.
What about the patient's FA rights? I guess the "judge" is more interested in furthering Leftist beliefs that adhering to the Constitution.
I'm still confused how the physician's FA rights fit into all this...
“The Supreme Court has upheld a Kentucky law slowing women a chance to see an ultrasound of their unborn baby before having an abortion.”
They need a new editor. I have no idea what they are trying to say.
Umm, the devil perhaps?
Imagine wanting to prevent up to 70% of women from participating in a medical procedure
Imagine being so opposed to life you forbid women from making that choice!
Millions of children
Who challenged it? man-hating feminazis who love abortion? They will do anything to protect their sacrament. Disgusting.
Thanks for all your efforts on the pro life sites, much appreciated.
We are a visually oriented species. What we can see becomes "real". When you see that little heart beating it moves from "pregnancy" to "baby".
You can end a pregnancy, killing your baby is a totally different thing.
Equally likely to be men who don't want to support their children.
So being “pro-choice” means denying a woman the choice to see an ultrasound before her abortion. And a doctor has a First Amendment right to withhold information from a patient before having them consent to a surgical procedure. Right.
I am convinced we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the abortion movement.
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.