Federal Judge blocks new Texas anti-abortion law: bidirectional: NPR



[ad_1]

Abortion rights advocates protest at the state capitol in Austin, Texas in 2013.

Tamir Kalifa / AP


hide caption

caption

Tamir Kalifa / AP

Abortion rights advocates protest at the State Capitol in Austin, Texas in 2013.

Tamir Kalifa / AP

A federal judge in Texas has overturned a ban on a commonly used second-trimester abortion procedure, which is another blow to efforts to restrict abortion in that state.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel's ruling followed a temporary injunction issued in August that prevented Texas from banning the procedure known as dilatation and evacuation, often referred to as "D & E." That court order was filed the day before the ban came into effect.

Texas law, known as Senate Bill 8 and signed by Governor Greg Abbott earlier this year, was challenged in a lawsuit filed by abortion providers. They argued that the ban would require women who try to interrupt their pregnancies to undergo additional "unnecessary, invasive and potentially painful medical procedures to access their constitutional right to an abortion," before beginning a D & E procedure.

] the court is unaware of any other medical context that requires a doctor, in contravention of the doctor's medical judgment and the best interest of the patient, to perform a medical procedure that does not benefit the woman, "Judge Yeakel wrote.

the judge's decision occurs on the day his temporary term expired.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton immediately filed a notice to appeal the decision to the 5 th Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States. [19659008] "During a five-day trial this month in the district court, we created a record like no other in the exhibition. n of the horror of abortions dismemberment. Not only society should tolerate the tearing of living human beings. Judge Yeakel wrote that the bill of the Senate 8 affects the constitutional rights of women seeking a second-term abortion.

Wrote:

"The court concludes the Act is an inappropriate use of the state's regulatory power over the medical profession to prohibit certain medical procedures and replace others in support of the legitimate interest of the state in regulating the medical profession in order to promote respect for the life of the unborn The valid interest of the State in promoting respect for the life of the unborn, although legitimate, is not sufficient to justify such a substantial obstacle to the constitutionally protected right of a woman to interrupt a pregnancy before fetal viability "

. Judge Yeakel added that at least seven other states have pbaded laws prohibiting abortions due to dilatation and evacuation. The courts of four states (Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas and Oklahoma) have prevented those laws from taking effect. A legal challenge is pending in Louisiana. Similar laws in Mississippi and West Virginia have not been challenged.

The sentence was praised by the defenders of the right to abortion.

"Today, the facts and the rule of law once again prevailed over a relentless and coordinated political agenda against the health and well-being of American women." The court's decision once again makes it clear that politicians do not they can force their way into private medical decisions that must remain between patients and doctors, "Nancy Northrup, president and executive director of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement.

[ad_2]
Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.