WaPo: Law Requiring Ultrasounds for Abortions Is Struck Down (Oklahoma)

[Heidi]

Oklahoma Judge Says Measure Violates State Constitution

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

An Oklahoma judge decided Tuesday that doctors do not need to perform ultrasounds and offer women detailed information about the tests before performing abortions, striking down the strictest such law in the country.

Oklahoma County District Judge Vicki L. Robertson ruled that the 2008 law, which included other abortion-related provisions, violated a state constitutional provision that requires laws to address only one subject.

Thirteen states regulate the provision of ultrasounds by abortion providers, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-health think tank. The provisions have been pushed by abortion opponents as a means of deterring women from having the procedures.

The Oklahoma law, which was never enforced, was the first to mandate that any woman seeking an abortion must have an ultrasound and that doctors describe the image in detail, including organs and extremities, even if the woman objects.

A Tulsa clinic run by Nova Health Systems, represented by the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights, filed a lawsuit charging that the law not only violated the state Constitution's "single-subject" rule but also infringed on a woman's right to privacy, violated her dignity and endangered her health.

Read more

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Most excellent!

That judge knows what she's up to.

Let's keep the looney tunes folks out of the law-making business.


K&R

[TexasObserver]

2. recommend

[krispos42]

3. Good.

It's a stupid window-dressing law.


If the anti-choice people wanted to reduce the abortion rate they'd have comprehensive sex ed in school and pass out birth control. Instead they pull this shit.

[Heidi]

4. It wasn't window dressing. It was a blatant attempt by religious extremists

to proselytize and guilt monger. It was a by-the-backdoor means of interfering with women's right to autonomy in making medical choices.

[ConsAreLiars]

5. Precisely. Exactly. Well said.

Calling it "window dressing" reveals a callous and insensitive blindness to the motives and impact of that vile law that is shocking, at least when exposed here on DU.

(edit to add the text)

[krispos42]

6. I know that, but it was really so that the anti-choice forces had something to bloviate about

It was an irritant with likely no noticabl change in abortion rates. But then the Repubs could generate much fanfare about how pro-life they are on the stump.

:eyes:

[Heidi]

9. Here's the thing. I grew up there, and I know very well the hold the Southern Baptists,

Church of Christ and Pentecostals have on the hearts and wombs of many women in Oklahoma. I do believe, had that law been enforced, it would have dovetailed perfectly with religious extremists' attempts to limit women's health care choices through fear. I have never met a woman who didn't know what a developing fetus looked like; to force women to look at an ultra-sound of a fetus is fear-mongering. Sexist, too. Period.

[krispos42]

11. Fear-mongering and sexist? Can't argue with that!

It's the only tool in their toolbox, really.

[Grey]

7. Thanks Heidi,

Well said.

[Heidi]

14. Hi, Grey!

Good morning. :hi:

[Grey]

15. I'm going to have to look up the

state Constitution's "single-subject" law.

And good morning to you.

[ThomCat]

8. That's great! Now, can we get the anti-choice nuts to stop

wasting everyone's time with this shitty legislation? Please?

Can we get their organizations labeled Domestic Terrorists instead of the Peace Activists and Vegans. The Anti-choice nut jobs have really assassinated people and daily advocate violence against pro-choice doctors and patients.

[Heidi]

12. I'm sure they don't consider it a waste of time.

Fear-mongering has worked so well for so long for religious extremists that it must strike them as an appropriate strategy. :(

[onestepforward]

10. Good news! n/t

[Liberal_in_LA]

13. excellent