When he signed the country’s most restrictive anti-abortion bill into law last April, Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant called it “the first step in a movement to do what we campaigned on: . . . to end abortion in Mississippi.”
And but for a judge’s rulings July 1, he would have achieved it, making Mississippi the first state in the nation since Roe v. Wade where a woman could not legally terminate her pregnancy.
Usually anti-abortion activists are more circumspect, arguing that imposing new rules on clinics is for women’s health, or parental consent laws are designed to protect families. But not here. Gov. Bryant and the law’s sponsors were clear that they wanted to make abortion impossible in their state. There’s only one clinic in all of Mississippi where a woman can get an abortion today, down from fourteen in the 1980’s, and the majority pro-life legislature wants it closed, making the entire state abortion-free.
Can they do that?
No, not according to Roe v. Wade, and other Supreme Court decisions that since 1973 have upheld a woman’s constitutional right to choose whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992 the Supreme Court took aim at the anti-abortion camp’s strategy of loading up clinics with so many legal requirements that they’d have to shut down altogether. No, the Supreme Court said, a state may not impose “substantial obstacles” to women’s constitutional right to abortion. It may not “unduly burden” the exercise of her constitutional right.
Which brings us back to Mississippi. Its law required abortion providers to be OB-GYNs who have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, which – surprise! – none of the abortion providers in Mississippi do. (They are out-of-state OB-GYNs who have tried to getting admitting privileges to local hospitals, unsuccessfully.)
On Wednesday, federal judge Daniel P. Jordan III, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled the law went too far, and barred Mississippi from implementing it pending a full hearing on the case.
Mississippi is the poorest state in the union, with the highest teen pregnancy rate.
For now, the clinic stays open.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not necessarily those of Avvo.com.
11 comments
Curtis J Neeley Jr
There has NEVER been the right to an abortion and Roe v Wade is the most misread ruling ever made. Per Roe v Wade, there has been a right to privately decide to remove a sperm-induced infection even if called a child. Yes; The right to remove a sperm-induced infection is a recent fundamental human right but there is no right to medical assistance. The decision to remove a sperm-induced infection by pill should be seen as a fundamental human right today per Roe v Wade. The rights to the sperm-induced infection is exclusively the woman's ONLY until this becomes known to the sperm donor. This then becomes a two party agreement already made that must be resolved equitably. Killing a donated sperm instead of allowing it to live. Until the sperm-induced infection becomes public knowledge the public has absolutely no business in this choice.
===========================
The use of the Confederate States of America flag in the article graphic is offensive as is the tacked on economic statistic. Susan B. Anthony, the only US person fined for voting while female, opposed granting former male slaves the right to vote or the Nineteenth Amendment because this left female "people" second class citizens.
===========================
I asked a question at Av/ vo
JoeJoe
This is what should be in the 28th
amendment to the United
States Constitution (ABORTION CLARIFICATION).
A woman's right, to control her own body,
does not supersede the right of the child, baby, infant, the partially born,
fetus, embryo, or fertilized egg that the woman carries, inside her body, to
"Life, Liberty,
and the Pursuit of Happiness."
Abortion is really a balance of
individual rights’ issue. The child's right to be born, live, and not be
terminated, unnecessarily, versus the adult’s right to live and not to die in
the process of bringing forth new life to the world.
The only time an abortion must be used
is when the pregnancy becomes a direct, immediate, physical threat to the life
of the mother (common law of self-dense; to protect ones own life or the life
of another with the use of deadly force). This is where the pregnancy cannot be
brought to full term and/or the child cannot be brought forth, out of the
woman’s body, by using modern delivery techniques. These techniques would
consist of inducing labor with drugs, using the surgical procedure referred to
as “C-Section”, or other medical processes yet to be developed, that saves the
life of the mother and preserves the life of the child; only then should an
abortion be considered.
The umbilical cord is not a connection
between mother and child equivalent to an appendage such as a toe, finger,
hand, etc… to the human body, but a lifeline of responsibility to feed,
nurture, and protect offspring by a parent at all costs, even in some cases
above self preservation. It is also equivalent to a father feeding, nurturing,
and protecting his offspring at all costs, even in some cases above self-preservation,
when the child is outside of the womb.
Even though rape and incest are evil,
immoral, illegal, violent, despicable, and heinous crimes, the child that may
result from such acts, must not be destroyed, in or out of the womb, to atone
for the crime.
Government funding, of any kind, must
not be used to fund any abortions of any kind. It would be a conflict of
interest. The Government has a responsibility and a duty to protect all human
life no matter what stage of human physical development has occurred.
Abortion is a term, used to describe a
procedure, used to terminate a human life at the beginning of life and not for
describing or related to the death penalty. The death penalty is where a human
being has lived a life, made choices in that life, performed actions in that
life, and has been adjudicated the death penalty for the use of deadly force,
in that life, in an unjustified manner.
If the biological mother and/or
biological father cannot; and/or is unable to; and/or do not want to; and/or
incapable of; caring for and/or raising the child then the child must be put up
for immediate adoption after the child is born.
If maternal members of the family and/or
paternal members of the family desire to keep the child in the family they will
have first refusal on an adoption; to care for and/or raise the child then they
must complete the adoption process after the child is born. Otherwise, anyone
can go through the adoption process to adopt the child.
The case “Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S.
113 (1973)” is not necessarily settled law. It is a United States Supreme Court
ruling, which when the court has been presented with new evidence or a new
logical way of thinking on the issue, in this case abortion on demand, can be
reversed. The court can reverse its
previous decision at anytime after such consideration.
Stopusagiveaway Onenationunder
Abortion after sex should not signify "birth control" that is available. But then we have the blacks and hispanics with an 80-90% illegitimacy rate for which there are dwindling US Taxpaying working US Citizens of Generations: but not much longer. And out of those 2/3 's USA pop increase alone si from Mexico! And out of those 60% dropouts, 40% baby shake syndrome abuse, killed, abused, neglected: and the public can no longer afford what our self perpetuating gov continues to reward if we the people want to remain a sovereign entity now controlled by the COMMUNIST because of our coward deceptive TRAITORS WITHIN...giving away the USA faster than those of us can obtain the information to stand up against the EVIL TRAITORS WITHIN...vs One Nation Under GOD!
CliffordtheBigRedDog
Trying to find the quote on Governor Bryant's website. I'm sure he did say those two sentence parts in some speech, somewhere, but I only found this statement of his "when he signed the... bill into law last April" 16th, 2012: http://www.governorbryant.com/governor-phil-bryant-signs-house-bill-1390/
Please direct me more specifically to a link to your quote. Thank you.
JaimeKG2
Hello,
Here is the link to a CNN article quoting Gov. Phil Bryant:
1. http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/11/us/mississippi-abortion-clinic-hearing/index.html
CliffordtheBigRedDog
Why don't you actually come right out and make a clear point about what the poverty rate has to do with abortion in Mississippi, instead of giving a ranking to infer causality?
Mississippi has had the highest poverty rate among the states for many decades.
Are you inferring there is a link between access to abortion and poverty, or just inferring that it's some way to be mean to poor people?
Was the poverty rate in Mississippi less in the 1980s when they had fourteen abortion clinics? No, the poverty rate was higher at that time compared to now, actually rising during the 1980s, according to the Census statistics.
Here are the states ranked by poverty rates from 1969 to 1989 ( http://www.census.gov/apsd/www/statbrief/sb93_15.pdf ), here is 1990 to 2000 ( http://www.dataplace.org/rankings/ ), and finally 2008-09 ( http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/acsbr09-1.pdf ).
Mississippi's poverty rate dropped from 35.4% (1969) to 23.9 (1979) then rose to 25.2 (1989), then dropped to 19.9 (2000) then rose to 21.9 (2009).
Concerned in NJ
Concerned in NJ Hello Ms. Bloom, I have a question? I am the Administratrix of my grandmother's estate--my grandmother died without a will in New Jersey in 1949. I became the Administratrix of her estate in 2007 after my aunt who was one of my grandmother's children died in 2007. The real property of my grandmother's estate has been sold and the heirs disagree regarding how distribution should be made. So I want to have an Accounting done. However, I only have records that go back 10 to 12 years. i still want to have a formal accounting where the records that I do have are audited by the court and a judge sees them. Ms. Bloom what do you think of me having only 10 to 12 years of records for the court Accountant to look over when the Date of Death of my grandmother is in the year 1949?
JaimeKG2
Hello,
It sounds like you have a great legal question for a lawyer
in Avvo’s free legal question and answer forum. Lawyers do not answer questions
posted here to the NakedLaw blog, but they will answer those posted in the Q&A forum on
the Avvo site. Here is the link where you can post your question(s): http://www.avvo.com/ask-a-lawyer.
Best of luck!
JaimeKG2
Hello,
It sounds like you have a great legal question for a lawyer
in Avvo’s free legal question and answer forum. Lawyers do not answer questions
posted here to the NakedLaw blog, but they will answer those posted in the Q&A forum on
the Avvo site. Here is the link where you can post your question(s): http://www.avvo.com/ask-a-lawyer.
Best of luck!
Jaime
Avvo, Inc.
www.avvo.com
Brian Clark
There is an 18 year old who is hispanic young male who was arrested for simple assualt on 07/16/2012. Upon entering the 4th ave. Jail around 1am this 18 year old was brutely beat, tazed 3 times in his spine, mased and had mcso officers footprints planted so hard on his head it caused bruising inside his ear. He was then dragged by his arm strpped of his clothes and placed in a dry cell and not ...allowed any water, restroom or bed for 8 hours after He did not recieving medical attention for his injuries substaned by the msco officers. On 07/18/2012 thanks to one honest detention officer who noticed that his injuries from the mis-treatment by the Mcso demanded that this young adult be taken to Maricopa Medical center for treatment. upon seeing a doctor at the hospital for a eye injury he substainned prior to going to the jail the doctor noticed the severe bruising on this young adult. It was documented and even stated by the attending doctor that the young man is lucky that the detention officers did not paralyze him from the way they stood on his had and repeatly tazed him directly on his spinal cord three times in a row and for the exessive amount of time the tazer was held agonst his spinal cord. upon finding this out the Parents contacted Mcso ans was told to file a complaint on line and they refused to let the parents talk to any one at the jail or at the Mcso Office to ensure that their son well being is not in harms way from the people who took a oath to serve. They were told it is a sherriff Office policy not to allow any complaints to be heard in person or on the phone that they only will allow a complaint to be filed on line. The Partents made several more phone calls and searched the internt for someone that would help. they found a link that stated that Mr Rowan would take all complaints of abuse by law enforcement and look into the allegation to ensure that the public was safe from criminal activities to the best of his ability through proven policing practices and to ensure that the officer are held to a higher standard when it came to civil rights of all parties. Not really believing this as he is running for sherriff the parents called the number listed in desperate hope that Mr. rowan was as true to his word and not just blowing smoke to get elected. Immediately upon Rowan hearing this story, he personally got involved by notification of media, posting the 18 year olds bail in full out of his own pocket for the safety of this young adult. He contacted civil rights advocate groups, civil right attorneys to help bring justice to the officers who brutely abused this young adult with excessive physical force while this young adult was handcuffed the entire time. There are many polictions running and say thing as Mr. Rowan has that they want change and they are here to protect and serve. Actions speak louder then words. I fully endorce Rowan for sheriff. Please spread the word to help get Mr. Rowan where he belongs, as Maricopa County Sheriff! Please share this story to everyone you know. he is a man of his word for this is our son MCSO did this to. Mcso almost a month ago did almost the same thing to a older man who died from his injuries by the hands of the Mcso. Sherriff Arpio looks the other way at inmate abuse and this needs to stop and the officers that are involved in excessive use of force needs to be held accountable through the legal system not the arpio way.... this young man is due to be released on friday night after almost 18 hours from the time his bail is posted. please join him to see for your self the bruising , footprints, tazer marks on his back, black and blue lower lip, swollen elbow and arms and how scared this young adult is when he first walks out of the Mcso jail upon thier slow release.... Mark my words Mr Arpio your Office will answer for your Officers mistreatment of inmates under your care if this is the last thing i ever do. no matter the race or age they are human and your office needs to treat them like they are human.
Laurie
I would not use any legal or medical service that was pro-death. Abortion kills innocent humans and it's done by the mother! How grotesque. Laurie