The First Amendment Guarantees ALL Freedoms, including a Truthful Press
Planned Parenthood tweaks lawsuit against NC abortion regulations
Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the Carolina Journal. The author of this post is CJ Staff.
Planned Parenthood and a Duke Health doctor have updated their lawsuit against North Carolina's new abortion regulations. They filed an amended complaint Monday in advance of a return trip to federal court in September.
A Sept. 21 hearing in Greensboro before U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles will determine whether portions of the abortion law will face a preliminary injunction.
Eagles issued an order on June 30 that placed a temporary restraining order on one section of the law. It dealt with a documentation requirement for doctors using abortion drugs. Eagles allowed the rest of the law to take effect on July 1. The law, Senate Bill 20, limits most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The new 28-page complaint acknowledges that lawmakers made changes through House Bill 190 that addressed many complaints found in the original lawsuit filed in June. At that time, Planned Parenthood and Duke Health Dr. Beverly Gray had asked Eagles to block the entire law from taking effect.
"As a result of the changes to the Act, many of Plaintiffs' original claims have been resolved," plaintiffs' lawyers wrote. Three complaints remain. First, plaintiffs "maintain their due process challenges" to the new law's "IUP Requirement." The law requires a doctor to document an "intrauterine pregnancy" on a woman's medical chart when using abortion drugs. That's the section of the law Eagles blocked in June.
Second, Planned Parenthood challenges a "hospitalization requirement" set to take effect Oct. 1. The law says abortions provided under limited circumstances after 12 weeks of pregnancy must take place in a hospital rather than abortion clinic.
Third, "Dr. Gray adds to the Amended Complaint allegations about the vagueness of the Induction Abortion Ban." The updated lawsuit mentions a "lack of clarity as to whether a hospital can provide an induction abortion, which involves the use of medication, to a rape or incest survivor after the twelfth week of pregnancy."
"Plaintiffs who fail to comply with the Act will face disciplinary action, and violations of some sections of the Act carry felony criminal penalties," lawyers wrote in the updated complaint.
"The Act will harm North Carolinians by delaying - and even, at times, denying - their access to necessary health care," lawyers argued. "The IUP Documentation Requirement will harm patients by preventing them from accessing medication abortion before an intrauterine pregnancy can be seen on ultrasound. This may delay patients' access to abortion care, unnecessarily exposing them to increased medical risk, or compel them to consider a procedural abortion, even though for some patients, medication abortion offers important advantages over procedural abortion."
"For example, survivors of sexual assault may decide to have a medication abortion because they do not want instruments placed in their vagina," the complaint explained. "This is relevant to the IUP Requirement as well as the Induction Abortion Ban, which seemingly prohibits the use of medication to induce abortion in the second-trimester in the hospital setting for sexual assault survivors. Moreover, an induction abortion may be safer and faster for some patients."
"And the Hospitalization Requirement will have devastating consequences for survivors of sexual violence and patients with diagnoses of 'life-limiting anomalies' by limiting the number of providers available to these patients, increasing the expense of abortion and delaying or denying access to desperately needed care," lawyers wrote. "These heightened barriers will force patients who are already facing personal hardship and even trauma due to the circumstances of their pregnancies to remain pregnant against their will even longer."
The suit labels the abortion law "an attack on families with low incomes, North Carolinians of color, and rural North Carolinians."
"While the U.S. Supreme Court last year held that the right to abortion is no longer a fundamental substantive due process right under the Fourteenth Amendment, that amendment nonetheless protects other rights guaranteed to Plaintiffs and their patients," plaintiffs' lawyers wrote. "The Supreme Court's decision did not insulate abortion restrictions from court review if, as here, those restrictions are vague, irrational, and inflict a high risk of suffering for no legitimate governmental purpose."
Additional court filings from all parties in the case are expected in the coming weeks. Briefs will be finalized by Sept. 12.
N.C. Attorney General Josh Stein and state Health and Human Services Secretary Kody Kinsley are named defendants in the case, along with local district attorneys and leaders of the N.C. medical and nursing boards.
State Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, and House Speaker Tim Moore, R-Cleveland, are "intervenors" in the case. Eagles issued an order earlier this month allowing legislative leaders to defend the law moving forward. Berger and Moore asked to intervene after learning that Stein would not defend the law in court.
Eagles' Sept. 21 hearing will not involve testimony from witnesses. "The motion for preliminary injunction will be decided based on the record, and the Court does not contemplate receiving live evidence," Eagles wrote on July 6.
Go Back
Planned Parenthood and a Duke Health doctor have updated their lawsuit against North Carolina's new abortion regulations. They filed an amended complaint Monday in advance of a return trip to federal court in September.
A Sept. 21 hearing in Greensboro before U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles will determine whether portions of the abortion law will face a preliminary injunction.
Eagles issued an order on June 30 that placed a temporary restraining order on one section of the law. It dealt with a documentation requirement for doctors using abortion drugs. Eagles allowed the rest of the law to take effect on July 1. The law, Senate Bill 20, limits most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The new 28-page complaint acknowledges that lawmakers made changes through House Bill 190 that addressed many complaints found in the original lawsuit filed in June. At that time, Planned Parenthood and Duke Health Dr. Beverly Gray had asked Eagles to block the entire law from taking effect.
"As a result of the changes to the Act, many of Plaintiffs' original claims have been resolved," plaintiffs' lawyers wrote. Three complaints remain. First, plaintiffs "maintain their due process challenges" to the new law's "IUP Requirement." The law requires a doctor to document an "intrauterine pregnancy" on a woman's medical chart when using abortion drugs. That's the section of the law Eagles blocked in June.
Second, Planned Parenthood challenges a "hospitalization requirement" set to take effect Oct. 1. The law says abortions provided under limited circumstances after 12 weeks of pregnancy must take place in a hospital rather than abortion clinic.
Third, "Dr. Gray adds to the Amended Complaint allegations about the vagueness of the Induction Abortion Ban." The updated lawsuit mentions a "lack of clarity as to whether a hospital can provide an induction abortion, which involves the use of medication, to a rape or incest survivor after the twelfth week of pregnancy."
"Plaintiffs who fail to comply with the Act will face disciplinary action, and violations of some sections of the Act carry felony criminal penalties," lawyers wrote in the updated complaint.
"The Act will harm North Carolinians by delaying - and even, at times, denying - their access to necessary health care," lawyers argued. "The IUP Documentation Requirement will harm patients by preventing them from accessing medication abortion before an intrauterine pregnancy can be seen on ultrasound. This may delay patients' access to abortion care, unnecessarily exposing them to increased medical risk, or compel them to consider a procedural abortion, even though for some patients, medication abortion offers important advantages over procedural abortion."
"For example, survivors of sexual assault may decide to have a medication abortion because they do not want instruments placed in their vagina," the complaint explained. "This is relevant to the IUP Requirement as well as the Induction Abortion Ban, which seemingly prohibits the use of medication to induce abortion in the second-trimester in the hospital setting for sexual assault survivors. Moreover, an induction abortion may be safer and faster for some patients."
"And the Hospitalization Requirement will have devastating consequences for survivors of sexual violence and patients with diagnoses of 'life-limiting anomalies' by limiting the number of providers available to these patients, increasing the expense of abortion and delaying or denying access to desperately needed care," lawyers wrote. "These heightened barriers will force patients who are already facing personal hardship and even trauma due to the circumstances of their pregnancies to remain pregnant against their will even longer."
The suit labels the abortion law "an attack on families with low incomes, North Carolinians of color, and rural North Carolinians."
"While the U.S. Supreme Court last year held that the right to abortion is no longer a fundamental substantive due process right under the Fourteenth Amendment, that amendment nonetheless protects other rights guaranteed to Plaintiffs and their patients," plaintiffs' lawyers wrote. "The Supreme Court's decision did not insulate abortion restrictions from court review if, as here, those restrictions are vague, irrational, and inflict a high risk of suffering for no legitimate governmental purpose."
Additional court filings from all parties in the case are expected in the coming weeks. Briefs will be finalized by Sept. 12.
N.C. Attorney General Josh Stein and state Health and Human Services Secretary Kody Kinsley are named defendants in the case, along with local district attorneys and leaders of the N.C. medical and nursing boards.
State Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, and House Speaker Tim Moore, R-Cleveland, are "intervenors" in the case. Eagles issued an order earlier this month allowing legislative leaders to defend the law moving forward. Berger and Moore asked to intervene after learning that Stein would not defend the law in court.
Eagles' Sept. 21 hearing will not involve testimony from witnesses. "The motion for preliminary injunction will be decided based on the record, and the Court does not contemplate receiving live evidence," Eagles wrote on July 6.
Comments
|
I can read Stan. I'm just not overly impressed with your "big brain".
BTW the BO isn't journalistic. its a chat board where people, including myself, cut, paste and express their opinion. Great fun indeed, but hardly journalism. |
|
Big Bob: The evidence is throughout this journalistic, social networking platform, one that you do not read, one you only troll as a Leftist puppet, so forgive me if I express this one truth, "I ain't taking you to raise."
Your poor education is not my responsibility to mend; not when I have tremendous sums of tax dollars for your education, and I also provide this expansive platform for the truth to be expressed and exposed every day, even for vapid internet trolls such as yourself Big Bob. |
|
|
Big Bob: Word salad? Big Bob you have your alias to hide behind; and you have the privilege to come here and spew Leftist stupidity, and, again, you are welcome to do so.
You are the perfect foil those of Us who know so much, since you know so little, while always supporting, without fail, the insipid dogma of the Non Patriot Left. |
|
|
Again Stan, you offer a word salad with no evidence to back it up. Clearly the Trump style seems to fit, but saying anything just to hear the sound of your own voice in an effort to appear relevant is not good stratergery.
Planned Parenthood provides a big chunk of the medical care needed by the poor. Yes it includes abortion which is medical care many women need. Including the girlfriend of Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson. I understand your religious background does not tolerate free thinking women, but you better get used to it. If they go back to the kitchen it will be their choice, not yours. |
|
|
Big Bob: Humor the rest us here that are not members of your Non Patriot Left: How is what I comment here not true?
How can Democratic Socialists acting as a political force in congress taking hundreds of million of dollars of taxpayer dollars to allocate to Planned Parenthood so they may continue to operate an abortion mill; the end result being that Democratic Socialists can keep their promise of "Abortion on Demand" viable; juxtaposed against Planned Parenthood donating tens of millions of dollars every two years to Democratic Socialist congresspeople, in campaign donations, NOT be a campaign violation? Big Bob: Is every time you autocratically and often state, "None of this is true" here on Eastern NC NOW always a falsehood? |
|
|
None of that is true
|
|
|
Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Socialists in congress conspire every year to defraud the United States taxpayers of hundreds of millions of dollars by committing Election Fraud every two years, benefitting Democratic Socialists by tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions.
Do you see the Democratic Socialist grift here, or do I need to draw you a map? |
| Lawmakers move forward on bill requiring students to have a career development plan | Carolina Journal, Editorials, Op-Ed & Politics | NCSBE approves student and employee ID cards for future elections |
Home
Contact
About
Service Rates
Privacy Policy
Follow on Facebook
Subscribe to Newsletters
Rss Feed
Keywords
Eastern NC Now & ENC NOW © Copyright 1998-2024 All Rights Reserved.
An example of such is this Social Networking Platform of mine is not the "BO;" it is Eastern NOW (easternncnow.com , easternnorthcarolina now.com , beaufortcountynow.com), and it is the an outlet of journalism that takes a backseat to none here in this region of North Carolina.
I have nothing to do with the "BO" other than provide them Autonomous Administrated space on this platform that we created, and that I own right down to every piece of code that it takes to manage and power this Social Networking Platform to the heights that it has now reached.
Big Bob: If you could read for comprehension, if you possessed reasonable powers of observation, you would have surmised enough not to come off like an authoritative idiot about us being the "BO" ... yet, you are a Leftist, and while you may believe that this intellectual construct of yours absolves you from having to think, I will remind you that Stupid is not a protected class ... not around these parts that is my domain.