The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit is about to decide if Mississippi will be the first state in the nation that will not have an abortion provider.
The court is considering a 2012 law that would require all abortion clinics that kill more than 10 babies per year via abortion to have physicians that are certified in obstetrics and gynecology and have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.
The law was passed in April 2012 but pro-abortionists have been challenging the law in courts since passages. They were able to get a federal judge to issue a preliminary injunction in 2013 saying it was likely unconstitutional because it would close the state’s only clinic.
Governor Phil Bryant said his intent to sign the law was to “make Mississippi abortion free.”
The 5th Circuit is the same court that upheld a Texas law with the same restrictions as the Mississippi law. That law closes all but six clinics in Texas.
The pro-abortionists say they will “fight to the end” to make sure women can kill their babies in Mississippi via abortion.
Mississippi is the latest state to put a restriction on abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy.
The bill is connected to a medical research study showing that a baby definitively feels pain at the 20th week of gestation, halfway through the length of a full-term pregnancy. The Mississippi law refers specifically to that research as the basis for the bill.
The law provides an exemption after 20 weeks if the woman’s life is in danger or if the baby has significant deformities that it would not survive outside the womb at full term.
“Today is an important day for protecting the unborn and the health and safety of women in Mississippi,” Governor Phil Bryant said in a statement.
Other states passing similar laws are Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Oklahoma and Texas.
Pro-abortionist were critical of the bill saying it did not provide enough exemptions for women such as in the case of incest.
A group of Colorado legislators are attempting to pass a bill that would stop the state from being able to pass laws adding any restrictions to abortion.
The bill, called the “Reproduction Health Freedom Act”, would prohibit state and local governments from interfering with “reproductive health care” meaning that the state could not put restrictions on abortion among other things related to human sexuality.
The only exception to the law would be a bill proposed that has “current evidence-based scientific data and medical consensus.”
The bill, which was created and is being pushed heavily by Democratic members of the House and Senate, is being called an attempt to shut down anyone who opposes abortion from having their voice heard in the Colorado political process.
The bill’s sweeping attempts to silence abortion opponents has stirred the Catholic Church in Colorado to mobilize their members to call members of the House and Senate to tell them to vote against the bill.
The Alaska House of Representatives has passed a law that would put new restrictions on abortions.
The bill would define a “medically necessary” abortion that would then place limits on what kinds of abortions can receive state funding. State funding through Medicaid would be prohibited from paying for any elective abortions.
Opponents of the bill are making the usual claims that the bill is just aimed to keep low-income women from ending the lives of their babies via abortion.
“This bill has nothing to do with restricting a women’s right to an abortion,” Representative Gabrielle LeDoux told Anchorage Daily News. “We’ve got the right to travel, but it doesn’t mean the government buys us a ticket to Paris. We’ve got the right to bear arms, but the government doesn’t buy us a Sturm Ruger.”
Democrats said the bill will not save the state any money since pro-abortionists would file repeated lawsuits to stop the law which will cost the state for legal defense.
The bill is headed back to the state Senate for a final vote before heading to the Governor.
A U.S. District Court judge has refused to block a new set of abortion regulations in Arizona.
The regulations now in effect will require abortionists to follow FDA guidelines for prescribing and dispensing abortion producing drugs such as RU486. The FDA guidelines prohibit the use of those drugs after the seventh week of pregnancy.
Attorneys for Planned Parenthood has sued to stop the law claiming that requiring abortionists to follow the federal government’s guidelines on the drug would harm women.
Judge David C. Bury ruled that it was still to be seen if the law is an obstacle to abortion but that based on what was presented to the court the measure did not create irreparable harm.
The pro-life Center for Arizona Policy released a statement praising the court’s action saying that the decision upheld a common sense health and safety standard and that it was a victory for anyone who truly cared about the well-being of women.
A district court judge who blocked Alabama’s abortion law announced they will be holding a trial to discover the “merits” of the law.
Judge Myron Thompson, appointed by President Carter in 1980, issued a decision on the law saying that if the court finds the law was passed in an attempt to protect the lives of an unborn baby, then the law is unconstitutional.
Pro-abortion groups including Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and Reproductive Health Services immediately attacked the law upon passage, which Governor Robert Bentley signed last year. The judge placed the law on hold because he said evidence had to be reviewed regarding the effects of the law.
Abortion supporters say the law’s requirement that abortionists obtain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital is too restrictive because most hospitals won’t give those privileges. They claim at least three of the state’s five abortion clinics would have to close if the law is allowed to go into effect.
The Alabama legislature is considering three new bills to curtail abortion in the state.
The governor of West Virginia has vetoed a bill that would have extended protection to unborn children.
Democrat Earl Ray Tomblin is the governor in the nation to veto a bill that would ban abortion after 20 weeks. Tomblin, who has previously claimed that he was pro-life, said his reason for vetoing the bill was that he believed it was unconstitutional.
“The bill is also problematic because it unduly restricts the physician-patient relationship. All patients, particularly expectant mothers, require the best, most unfettered medical judgment and advice from their physicians regarding treatment options,” Tomblin said. “The medical community has made it clear to me that the criminal penalties this bill imposes will impede that advice, and those options, to the detriment of the health and safety of expectant mothers.”
Pro-life groups were stunned by the governor’s move because of his previous claims of being pro-life.
“The governor has placed himself in a minority position on this bill,” Wanda Franz, president of West Virginians for Life, told Christian News.
A U.S. appeals court has upheld a Texas law that requires abortionists to gain admitting privileges at a local hospital less than 30 miles from their abortion clinics.
A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans ruled the law put in place last July is Constitutional and does not place an undue burden on abortionists or women seeking to end the lives of their babies via abortion.
Lawyers for Planned Parenthood brought in abortionists had told the court that the regulation was unconstitutional because it would require abortion clinics in the state to close. Sixteen abortion clinics in the state have already closed because of the law.
Pro-life supporters say that many of the clinics are not actually closing because of the hospital privilege requirement, but rather they did not want to pay to upgrade their facilities to the same levels of hygiene and safety as other ambulatory surgery clinics.
The decision overturns a lower court ruling that requiring the admitting privileges was unconstitutional.
Abortion advocates said they would continue their fight in the courts to make sure more abortions would be able to continue in the state of Texas.
South Carolina’s House of Representatives have passed a bill that would ban most abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy.
The move brings the state closer to being the latest putting the 20 week restriction on the ending of a child’s life via abortion.
House representatives voted 84 to 29 to approve the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” that bans abortion after the midpoint of a pregnancy except in the case of a woman’s life being at risk. If approved by the Senate and signed by the governor, it would make South Carolina the 13th state to enact the ban.
Doctors who violate the law could face fines up to $10,000 and three years in prison.
Similar laws are currently working their way through the legislatures of West Virginia and Mississippi.
The West Virginia legislature has passed a bill that would ban most abortions after 20 weeks and have sent it to the governor for his signature.
House Bill 4588, called the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” says that except in the case of medical emergency no abortion may be performed or induced unless the doctor performing the abortion has made a determination of the post fertilization age of the unborn child.
West Virginians for Life released a statement hailing the bill’s passage, saying it will protect West Virginia’s unborn babies and fulfills the state’s interest in making sure unborn children do not experience pain.
“Scientific research demonstrates that unborn babies can feel pain beginning by at least 20 weeks after conception,” the group said.
Pro-abortion groups in the state are making the normal claims that the bill takes away abortion rights.
West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin has expressed concerns in the past that the bill won’t stand up to a challenge in court.
