CA: Judge rules California abortion lawsuit can proceed

Bakersfield Californian ^ | 6/29/05 | AP - San Francisco

[NormsRevenge]

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A federal judge has refused to dismiss California's challenge to a national abortion law that could cost the state $49 billion in federal funds.

In December, President Bush signed federal regulations that would assess harsh financial penalties on states that discriminate against doctors who refuse to provide abortions.

California Attorney General Bill Lockyer and state school Superintendent Jack O'Connell sued the Bush administration in January, claiming California would be breaking its own state laws if it complies with the federal regulations.

California allows doctors and hospitals to refuse to perform abortions for religious or moral reasons, but the state requires them to perform the procedures when child birth would threaten the woman's life or health.

The federal law contains no exception for medical emergencies.

The Bush administration sought to dismiss the lawsuit, but U. S. District Judge Jeffrey White in San Francisco ruled Monday the issue could pose "an injury to California's sovereign interest."

[NormsRevenge]

U. S. District Court Jeffrey White..

GDubya appointee,, 2002

[Moral Hazard]

"The Bush administration sought to dismiss the lawsuit, but U. S. District Judge Jeffrey White in San Francisco ruled Monday the issue could pose "an injury to California's sovereign interest.""

I don't buy it. The Federal government isn't saying that California can't regulate abortion the way it wants too, just that the federal government won't give California any money if they do so in a way the federal government doesn't like.

I generally don't approve of the kind of tactic the federal government is using, but it's been upheld many times in the past.

[tomahawk]

So the state can order a doctor to dismember a person, against his/her religious beliefs, because another person's health is in alleged jeopardy?

[Dog Gone]

The problem is that the "woman's health" is broadly defined to be her state of mind, meaning it's a loophole big enough to drive Michael Moore through.

I wonder what California's penalties are for doctors who refuse to provide abortions for such emergencies.

[crazyhorse691]

Could somebody give me a reason that state school Superintendent Jack O'Connell is suing.

[Dog Gone]

The ruling itself doesn't mean much. It doesn't take much of an argument from either side to make a judge rule against summary judgment.

All this means is that the case will move closer to trial.

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

Los Angeles Lay Catholic Mission | January 2004 | Just Ignorant ...
In 1984, pro-abortion state assembly member Jack O'Connell spoke at their "Public
Safety Dinner." O'Connell is now state superintendent of public ...
www.losangelesmission.com/ed/articles/2004/0401mk2.htm


Newscomm
... and home schooling, gay rights, abortion, and separation of church and state."
... new Superintendent Jack O'Connell made a policy reversal last month, ...
www.homeedmag.com/nc/303/61703.html


Yake your pick @

http://www.google.com/search?biw=910&hl=en&q=%22Jack+O%27Connell%22+abortion

[D Rider]

The real problem is all the cr*p, (I mean graduates), that have been coming out of law school for the last 30 years. Even the good ones aren't all that good.

[fr_freak]

Interesting. The way I see it, if this suit is successful, it the ruling would set the principle that the federal goverment cannot interfere with the states' abortion laws. However, any such ruling would directly contradict the Roe vs. Wade ruling, which dictated to all the states exactly how they were going to treat abortion. My guess is this case gets smacked down.

[Alia]

bookmark

[calcowgirl]

http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr05/yr05rel14.asp

Said O'Connell: "The Weldon amendment threatens to hold funding for schools and other important government services hostage in an effort to force states to restrict women's reproductive health options. This unfair provision of federal law must not be allowed to stand. California law rightly protects women's reproductive freedom. Our schools and our students should not be penalized because of it."

[Paleo Conservative]

I generally don't approve of the kind of tactic the federal government is using, but it's been upheld many times in the past.

The DemocRATS loved it when they used that power to prevent states from removing the 55 mph speed limit.