« Roberts faces first major abortion case | Main | Supreme Court case starts today »
November 29, 2005
Supreme Court meets on abortion tomorrow
The Supreme Court will meet tomorrow to start hearing arguments on Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood, the court’s first abortion case in five years.
On a conference call last night for bloggers, speakers from NARAL, the ACLU Reproductive Freedoms Project and NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire explained that Ayotte is about a hell of a lot more than parental notification.
This case isn’t arguing whether or not parents should be notified or give consent when their daughters want to obtain an abortion--it’s about the health of young women:
But of the 43 states with parental-involvement statutes, New Hampshire is one of only five that do not also provide an exception for non-life-threatening medical emergencies, and it was on this basis that two lower federal courts declared the law unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court's decision in the case, Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, may therefore shed light on the contours of the "health exception" that the court's abortion precedents have required since Roe v. Wade in 1973.
No matter what someone thinks about abortion, I think any parent would want their child to get the best medical care possible. And if your daughter is in medical distress, you would want her doctor taking care of her, not running off to find a lawyer and judge.
In a press release, NARAL Pro-Choice America president said, “The Ayotte case illustrates what’s at stake when it comes to the balance of the Supreme Court...The Bush administration has weighed in on this case, which means it wants politicians – not doctors – to determine when women can and cannot receive the care they need. The Supreme Court’s decision in Ayotte could effectively dismantle Roe v. Wade’s core protection of women’s health and fundamentally alter how doctors challenge abortion restrictions that pose a threat to their patients’ health. If the Court sides with the Bush administration, we also will see an onslaught of anti-choice measures in state legislatures that would all but eliminate the right to choose for millions of American women.”
Scary as hell. So don’t let this one fall below the radar.
Posted by Jessica at November 29, 2005 11:31 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogforchoice.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2883
Comments
Another scary point that has slipped under the radar is that, currently, 86 per cent of the counties in America do not have a doctor that will perform an abortion, today. An onslaught? We have been under an onslaught for a long time now. While the primary focus is on the Supreme Court{an oxymoron} focus MUST be placed on local jurisdictions. Take a page from the book of fundamentalists tactics, that being placing people in positions, such as the local school boards where you can weld actual power.
Posted by: robert at December 1, 2005 4:02 AM
And it just so happens that my county in New Hampshire is one of them.
Posted by: Malafides Lucius at December 3, 2005 1:01 PM
Hey Malafides Lucius,
I have a dear friend,Adrianna,in New Hampshire, who has expressed the same sentiments.What do we do to correct these injustices? Perhaps a Malfoyan solution,eh?
Posted by: robert at December 4, 2005 4:39 AM
Oh, Robert, you know it's me! Malafides Lucius is my name in Latin class! I designed it myself.:)
P.S. I live in Southeastern N.H., which is probably the most populated area in the state, in which case it makes no sense that we have no APs. My nearest PP, which is PPNNE, is about an hour and a half away in Northern N.H. For someone who has no car and no license, it may as well be in Bosnia.
P.P.S. I recently came out to my dad as a liberal, and the first thing he said was, "I am so proud of you for doing the research and making your own opinions!"
Posted by: Malafides Lucius at December 4, 2005 8:53 AM
Hey look, robert and lucius together in the same place! Yup, it's a party!
Posted by: katthemad at December 7, 2005 7:46 PM
Hey katthemad,
You just made the party a jumpin' joint! Lucious, katthemad, what more could a party goer ask for? Me and two wonderfull women! NARAL knows how to throw a great party here,eh?
Posted by: robert at December 8, 2005 5:15 AM
Let's see, I have the brandy, the wine, the chocoaltes, and the Dark Arts. (Yes, I am a magical prcticioner, or at least try to be, but I am perfectly harmless.)
You see? New Englanders have a lot more food in their repertoire than lobster and clam chowder. Nor do they all pronounce it like "chowDA." I don't know anyone younger than 25 who says that, and most people of any age don't.
By the way, Robert, I am a beautiful neuter magus, but I can see where you would make the mistake! Thank you!
And thank you for Katthemad for showing up and NARAL for being such a good hostess. I would invite you to my house for a "graphically kick the crap out of the government legally" party, but I am a minor and don't yet have the time anyway.
Posted by: Malafides Lucius at December 10, 2005 8:59 AM
BTW, Robert, getting lonely?:)
Just kidding! Really!
Posted by: Malafides Lucius at December 10, 2005 9:02 AM