Tag Archives: Abortion Law

ACLU sues over FDA restrictions on abortion pill access

FILE PHOTO: A view shows the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland August 14, 2012. Picture taken August 14, 2012. REUTERS/Jason Reed

By Nate Raymond

(Reuters) – The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on Tuesday seeking to challenge U.S. Food and Drug Administration restrictions that limit the ability of women to access the so-called abortion pill.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Hawaii to challenge FDA restrictions that limit the dispensing of the pill, Mifeprex, to clinics, medical offices or hospitals rather than retail pharmacies.

The ACLU said that as a result, the FDA’s restrictions delay and in some cases block a woman’s access to abortion by requiring her to be handed Mifeprex by healthcare providers who have arranged to stock it in their facilities.

That is despite the fact that Mifeprex, which can be used for abortions up to 10 weeks into a pregnancy, is considered safe and has been recognized by the FDA itself as providing “meaningful therapeutic benefit,” the lawsuit said.

“The unique and harmful restrictions the FDA imposes on where and how a patient may receive Mifeprex deny women meaningful access to this safe and effective treatment with no medical justification,” the complaint said.

The FDA declined to comment.

Mifeprex, manufactured by Danco Laboratories, was approved in 2000 to terminate early pregnancy when given in combination with misoprostol, an anti-inflammatory drug that was originally approved to prevent gastric ulcers.

The lawsuit came after the FDA in March 2016 announced a decision to relax restrictions on the use of Mifeprex that were in place for over a decade.

The FDA eased access to it by updating the prescribing information on the drug’s label, thus expanding use to 70 days of gestation from 49 days, cutting the recommended dose of the drug and reducing the number of required visits to a doctor.

The ACLU filed its lawsuit on behalf of three healthcare associations and a family medicine doctor, Graham Chelius, who is based on the Hawaiian island of Kauai, which has no abortion providers.

According to the ACLU, while Chelius is qualified and willing to provide the pill, he cannot stock it at the hospital where he works due to objections from some colleagues and as a result his patients must fly to another island for abortions.

To support its case, the ACLU cited a June 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down a Texas abortion law imposing strict regulations on doctors and facilities.

(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Jonathan Oatis)

Illinois Republican governor signs controversial abortion bill

FILE PHOTO - Bruce Rauner talks to the media at the White House in Washington December 5, 2014. REUTERS/Larry Downing/File Photo

By Chris Kenning

CHICAGO (Reuters) – Illinois Republican Governor Bruce Rauner signed a controversial bill into law on Thursday to expand state-funded coverage of abortions for low-income residents on Medicaid and state employees.

The bill, approved by the state legislature in May, would also keep abortions legal in Illinois if the U.S. Supreme Court follows President Donald Trump’s call to overturn its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that made abortions legal 44 years ago.

Illinois’ Medicaid program has previously covered abortions in cases of rape, incest and when a mother’s life or health is threatened.

The expansion would enable poor women to obtain elective abortions. The bill would allow state employees to have the procedures covered under state health insurance.

Rauner, who had earlier suggested he would veto the measure, said in a statement that he had talked to woman around the state before making his decision.

“I understand abortion is a very emotional issue with passionate opinions on both sides. I sincerely respect those who believe abortion is morally wrong,” he said.

“But, as I have always said, I believe a woman should have the right to make that choice herself and I do not believe that choice should be determined by income,” Rauner added. “I do not think it’s fair to deny poor women the choice that wealthy women have.”

The decision comes as conservative legislatures and other Republican governors have sought in recent years to tighten regulations on abortion clinics and forced closures in states such as Texas and Kentucky.

The move by Rauner upset conservatives.

“Taxpayers should not be forced to fund something as controversial and culturally divisive as abortions,” Republican state Senator Dan McConchie told the Chicago Tribune.

Currently, 15 other states allow Medicaid to pay for abortion, including some required by courts, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

But Illinois is the first state in decades to voluntarily lift its restriction on Medicaid coverage of abortion, according to National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum.

“Under the Trump administration, we are potentially facing the greatest threat to reproductive rights in more than a generation. HB 40 ensures that abortion will remain legal in Illinois, regardless of what happens at the federal level,” the forum’s executive director, Sung Yeon Choimorrow, said in a statement.

(Reporting by Chris Kenning; Editing by Diane Craft)

Federal court strikes down abortion ultrasound law in Kentucky

(Reuters) – A federal court struck down a law in Kentucky on Wednesday that requires women seeking an abortion to first undergo an ultrasound and hear a description of the embryo or fetus.

The U.S. District Court Western District of Kentucky ruled that the state law is unconstitutional because it violates the free-speech rights of the patient and doctor, court documents showed.

The law “does not advance a substantial governmental interest, is not drawn to achieve the government’s interests, and prevents no actual harm,” U.S. District Judge David Hale wrote in his ruling.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit against the state on behalf of EMW Women’s Surgical Center, which the complaint said is the state’s sole licensed abortion facility, days after the measure was passed in January by Republican lawmakers in Kentucky.

“We are pleased that Kentucky women will no longer be subjected to this demeaning and degrading invasion into their personal health care decisions,” said Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, an ACLU attorney, in a statement.

The law requires a physician or qualified technician to perform the ultrasound and position the screen so the woman may view the images. The medical staff were required to describe what the images show, including the size of the fetus and any organs or appendages visible.

The law does not contain exceptions for women who are facing medical complications or are victims of rape or incest.

The requirement violates the speech rights of doctors and patients by forcing them to deliver and listen to a government-mandated message, according to the lawsuit.

The law was part of a renewed effort by abortion opponents nationwide to restrict the procedure.

Some 26 states have laws regarding ultrasounds and abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks reproductive policy.

(Reporting by Brendan O’Brien in Milwaukee, editing by Larry King)

Fate of Kentucky’s last abortion clinic goes to judge

FILE PHOTO: Escorts who ensure women can reach the clinic lineup as they face off protesters outside the EMW Women's Surgical Center in Louisville, Kentucky, U.S. on January 27, 2017. P REUTERS/Chris Kenning/File Photo

By Chris Kenning

(Reuters) – The fate of Kentucky’s last remaining abortion clinic is in the hands of a federal judge following a three-day trial that could make it the first U.S. state without a single clinic.

Kentucky’s anti-abortion Republican governor, Matt Bevin, earlier this year moved to revoke the license of the EMW Women’s Surgical Center clinic in Louisville, citing deficiencies in its transfer agreements with local hospitals.

The clinic filed suit and was joined by Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, which said the state has used the same rules to block it from providing abortions in the city. The groups are asking U.S. District Judge Greg Stivers to overturn regulations they argue are medically unnecessary and create an unconstitutional barrier to abortion.

A ruling could take months, since both sides have 60 days to present post-trial briefs the judge.

“The state is trying to shut down the only abortion clinic in Kentucky by enforcing regulations that have nothing to do with women’s health,” EMW attorney Don Cox said during the trial according to WLKY-TV.

Lawyers for the Bevin administration, which waged a licensing battle in 2016 that led to the shutdown of a Lexington clinic, argued the transfer agreements in question were meant to protect women.

During the trial, a state health regulator blamed hospitals, saying they failed to provide sufficient agreements, the Courier-Journal reported. EMW and Planned Parenthood alleged the Bevin administration pressured or intimidated hospital officials into refusing to enter such agreements.

The trial has drawn anti-abortion activists and abortion rights demonstrators outside the courthouse in a city that has become a flashpoint for the debate over abortion.

If the court rules in the state’s favor and the clinic is forced to close, it would leave Kentucky the only U.S. state with no abortion provider. Six other states have only one clinic.

Conservative legislatures and Republican governors have sought in recent years to tighten regulations on abortion clinics and forced closures in states such as Texas.

But courts have pushed back. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down parts of a Texas law that required clinics to meet hospital-like standards and for clinic doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.

The American Civil Liberties Union is providing legal help to the Kentucky clinic.

(Reporting by Chris Kenning; Editing by David Gregorio)

Kentucky trial could make state first in U.S. with no abortion clinic

Kentucky trial could make state first in U.S. with no abortion clinic

By Chris Kenning

(Reuters) – Kentucky’s “unapologetically pro-life” governor and the state’s last abortion clinic will square off on Wednesday in a federal courtroom in a case that could make it the first U.S. state without an abortion provider.

In a three-day trial, the state will argue before a U.S. District judge in Louisville that EMW Women’s Surgical Center does not have proper state-required agreements with a hospital and an ambulance service in case of medical emergencies.

The clinic, which earlier this year filed suit to stop the state from revoking its license, wants to overturn the regulations it says are unnecessary and create an unconstitutional barrier to abortion.

“In 37 years providing abortion, I’ve seen more than a dozen clinics close down in our state, and now ours is the last clinic standing in the entire state,” Ernest Marshall, a doctor and EMW clinic founder, said in a statement.

“The very right to access legal abortion in the state of Kentucky is on the line,” he added.

The case could test court interpretations of last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down parts of a Texas law that required clinics to meet hospital-like standards and for clinic doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.

Despite that ruling, conservative legislatures and Republican governors such as Kentucky’s Matt Bevin have continued to tighten new regulations on abortion clinics.

U.S. state legislatures enacted 41 new abortion restrictions in the first half of 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health think tank that supports abortion rights.

Abortion rights groups say that has reduced access to abortion, particularly in rural areas of the South and Midwest. Kentucky is among seven U.S. states with just one clinic left.

Bevin, whose administration waged a licensing battle in 2016 that led to the shutdown of a Lexington clinic, argued the transfer agreements in question were meant to protect women.

“It is telling that the abortion industry believes that it alone should be exempt from these important safety measures,” said Bevin spokeswoman Amanda Stamper.

EMW, which is the site of almost daily protests, argues that hospitals are already legally bound to accept any patient in an emergency and local EMS will transport patients without such agreements.

Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky joined the suit because it said the same transfer agreements were used to block a license for a facility in Louisville. The American Civil Liberties Union is providing legal help to the clinic.

(Reporting by Chris Kenning; Editing by Andrew Hay)

South Carolina governor bans abortion funding, hits healthcare

FILE PHOTO: Governor of South Carolina Henry McMaster speaks at 2017 SelectUSA Investment Summit in Oxon Hill, Maryland, U.S., June 19, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts/File Photo

By Ian Simpson

(Reuters) – South Carolina’s governor has ordered a ban on all state funding for abortion providers in a move Planned Parenthood on Friday called “political” and an attack on patients’ access to preventive healthcare.

Republican Governor Henry McMaster’s executive order bars state agencies from providing funds to any doctor or medical practice affiliated with an abortion clinic and operating with a clinic in the same site, his office said in a statement.

McMaster said there were a variety of taxpayer-funded medical agencies that provided women’s health and family planning services without performing abortions.

“Taxpayer dollars must not directly or indirectly subsidize abortion providers like Planned Parenthood,” he said in the statement.

Planned Parenthood has long been a target of those opposed to its abortion services, which it provides along with cancer screenings, birth control and testing for sexually transmitted diseases.

In his order signed on Thursday, McMaster also directed the state agency for Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for the poor and disabled, to seek permission from the federal government to bar abortion clinics from the state’s Medicaid provider network.

Under McMaster’s order, abortion providers are excluded from state family planning funds. Indiana and Arizona tried to enact similar restrictions but they were overturned in court, said Elizabeth Nash, an analyst with the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion policy.

Thirteen states have some restrictions on how family planning funds are used, Nash said. Federal law has long banned the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.

“South Carolina is among a handful of states that is trying something this broad,” she said in an interview.

In a statement, Planned Parenthood called the order from McMaster, who is seeking re-election next year, “politically motivated.” Planned Parenthood provides healthcare services to almost 4,000 people a year in South Carolina, it said.

“We will not stop fighting to protect our patients’ access to health care,” Jenny Black, president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, said in the statement.

There were seven facilities in South Carolina providing abortions in 2014, according to the most recent available figures on the Guttmacher Institute’s website. They include one clinic operated by Planned Parenthood in Columbia.

 

(Reporting by Ian Simpson in Washington; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Sandra Maler)

 

Texas governor signs bill to limit insurance coverage for abortions

FILE PHOTO: The Texas capitol building, crafted from pink granite, is seen in Austin, Texas September 19, 2012. REUTERS/Julia Robinson/File Photo

By Jon Herskovitz

AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) – The Republican governor of Texas signed into law on Tuesday a measure that will restrict insurance coverage for abortions, compelling women to buy a supplemental plan if they want coverage for the procedure.

Governor Greg Abbott said the measure known as House Bill 214 would protect abortion opponents from subsidizing the procedure. Democratic critics decried it as forcing people to buy “rape insurance.”

Texas, the most-populous Republican-controlled state, has been at the forefront in enacting abortion restrictions, with many of its measures followed by other socially conservative states. But when HB 214 goes into law on Dec. 1, Texas will be the 11th state to restrict abortion coverage in private insurance plans written in the state.

“As a firm believer in Texas values, I am proud to sign legislation that ensures no Texan is ever required to pay for a procedure that ends the life of an unborn child,” Abbott said in a statement.

The Republican sponsor of a Senate bill on abortion insurance restriction, Brandon Creighton, has told local media supplemental coverage would cost $12 to $80 a year.

House Bill 214, which passed both chambers this month, mostly on a party-line vote, does not offer exceptions for cases of rape or incest. Abortion rights groups said they plan a court fight to prevent it from becoming law.

“By signing HB 214 into law, Governor Abbott has told women and parents they must pay extra for what is tantamount to ‘rape insurance,'” Democratic Representative Chris Turner, who opposed the bill, said on Tuesday.

There are 25 states with restrictions on abortion coverage in plans set up by state exchanges as part of the Affordable Care Act under former Democratic President Barack Obama, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks such legislation.

Also on Tuesday, Abbott signed another measure that expands reporting requirements for complications arising from abortions.

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Edited by Colleen Jenkins and Sandra Maler)

Texas bill restricting insurance coverage for abortions nears approval

Texas bill restricting insurance coverage for abortions nears approval

By Jon Herskovitz

AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) – A Texas bill that would restrict insurance coverage for abortions was approved by the state’s Republican-controlled House of Representatives on Wednesday, a move critics called cruel and damaging to women’s health.

The House measure would ban insurance coverage for abortions and require women who wanted coverage to purchase a supplemental plan for an abortion, the latest effort by the most-populous Republican-controlled state to place restrictions on the procedure.

If enacted, the bill would take effect on Dec. 1 and make Texas the 11th state to restrict abortion coverage in private insurance plans written in the state.

The Republican-dominated Senate has passed a similar bill, and Republican Governor Greg Abbott has shown support for the measures.

The bill’s backers say it would protect abortion opponents from subsidizing the procedure. A Democratic critic decried it as forcing people to buy “rape insurance.”

“It’s a question of economic freedom and freedom in general,” Republican Representative John Smithee, the bill’s sponsor, said in House debate on Tuesday ahead of the bill receiving preliminary approval.

The Republican sponsor of the Senate bill, Brandon Creighton, has told local media supplemental coverage would cost $12 to $80 a year

House Bill 214, which passed mostly on a party-line vote, does not offer exceptions for cases of rape or incest. Abortion rights groups are likely fight the measure in court if enacted.

“Women and parents will be faced with the horrific decision of having to purchase ‘rape insurance’ to cover them if they are victimized,” Democratic Representative Chris Turner said in a statement. “This is not only ridiculous, but it is cruel.”

Idaho, Kansas and Oklahoma are among the 10 other states that make abortion coverage a supplement on private plans. There are 25 states with restrictions on abortion coverage in plans set up by state exchanges as part of the Affordable Care Act under former Democratic President Barack Obama, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks such legislation.

“It is surprising that Texas has not done this before,” said Elizabeth Nash, senior state issues manager for Guttmacher.

The insurance measure is one of several bills concerning abortion before Texas lawmakers in a special session that runs through next week.

The Senate has already approved bills that include requiring physicians to improve notification of complications that occur during abortions and another that prohibits local governments from having contracts with abortion providers and their affiliates.

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Lisa Shumaker)

Abortion rights groups sue Texas to block procedure ban

FILE PHOTO: Texas governor Greg Abbott speaks during an interview on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York, U.S. on July 14, 2015. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid/File Photo

By Chris Kenning

(Reuters) – Abortion rights groups filed a lawsuit on Thursday seeking to block a Texas law that bans the most common method of second-trimester abortion which critics argue erodes women’s rights.

The challenge, which came six weeks after the state’s governor signed the law, was the latest salvo in a battle over state laws enacted by Republican-controlled state legislatures that advocates say limit access to abortion.

“The law we challenged today in Texas is part of a nationwide scheme to undermine these constitutional rights and ban abortion one restriction at a time,” Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Austin by Texas abortion provider Whole Woman’s Health, Planned Parenthood groups and others.

The suit, which names Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and others as defendants, seeks an injunction and a ruling that the law is unconstitutional.

Paxton declined to comment on the challenge.

Anti-abortion group Texas Right to Life last month praised the legislation, calling it the “most significant pro-life victory” of the state’s legislative session.

The lawsuit targets a portion of the law – known as Senate Bill 8, which is set to go into effect on Sept. 1 – that bans dilation and evacuation abortion procedures.

The Texas law refers to the procedure as “dismemberment abortion,” in which a combination of suction and forceps are used to bring tissue through the cervix.

Opponents of the law say that after about 15 weeks of pregnancy it is the safest method of abortion.

Seven other U.S. states have approved similar bans, prompting legal challenges that prevented the bans from taking effect in Louisiana, Kansas and Oklahoma, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Last year, Whole Woman’s Health led a legal fight that ended in the U.S. Supreme Court striking down a Texas abortion law that had shuttered nearly half the state’s clinics by imposing strict regulations on doctors and facilities.

The latest Texas law, signed in June by the state’s Republican Governor Greg Abbott, also requires abortion providers to dispose of aborted fetal tissue through burial or cremation. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit intend to challenge that provision as well.

The state law was enacted despite the fact that U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks in Austin put a temporary halt on a similar state regulation on fetal tissue disposal in January.

(Reporting by Chris Kenning; editing by Daniel Wallis, G Crosse)

Judge halts Indiana abortion law targeting minors

FILE PHOTO: Healthcare activists with Planned Parenthood and the Center for American Progress pass by the Supreme Court as they protest in opposition to the Senate Republican healthcare bill on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., June 28, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts/File Photo

By Chris Kenning

(Reuters) – Indiana may appeal a U.S. court ruling that blocked parts of the state’s latest abortion law that critics said would deter girls under 18 from getting an abortion without parental approval, the state attorney general’s office said on Thursday.

U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Evans Barker issued a preliminary injunction late on Wednesday against portions of measure signed in April by Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb.

Indiana law already required parental consent for minors unless a judge provided a waiver known as a “judicial bypass.” The new law allowed the judge to notify parents if the waiver is granted, and was scheduled to take effect July 1.

Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky and the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana sued to stop the law in May, arguing it created an unconstitutional burden on minors and would create a chilling effect.

Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill is reviewing the ruling to determine whether to appeal, spokesman Corey Elliot said in an interview.

“Wednesday’s injunction essentially encourages a minor to go it alone through the emotionally and physically overwhelming procedure of aborting a human being,” Hill said in a statement.

“We will always support the authority of parents to know what is going on with their children.”

The judge also blocked provisions that barred abortion clinics from talking with teens about options in other states, and more stringent identification requirements for parents before their child gets an abortion.

“This decision affirms that the state must continue to provide a safe alternative for young women who – whatever their circumstances – are unable to talk to their parents about this difficult and personal decision,” ACLU of Indiana Legal Director Ken Falk said in a statement.

The Indiana State Department of Health recorded 244 abortions in 2015 of girls aged 10 to 17, roughly 3 percent of the state total.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a minor who is unable or unwilling to obtain parental consent for an abortion must be allowed to proceed if a judge determines that she is sufficiently mature to make the decision herself or that an abortion is in her best interest, the ACLU said.

(Reporting by Chris Kenning; Editing by Richard Chang)