Mississippi’s Only Abortion Clinic Will Remain Open

A law that would close the state’s only clinic was ruled unconstitutional Tuesday.

Pro-choice activists hold placards during a rally outside of the Supreme Court January 23, 2012 in Washington, DC. Activists on both sides of the abortion issue are rallying on the 39th anniversary of the landmark Roe vs Wade case. AFP PHOTO/Mandel NGAN 
National Journal
Sophie Novack
July 29, 2014, 12:24 p.m.

A fed­er­al Ap­peals Court has struck down a Mis­sis­sippi law that would have shuttered the state’s only abor­tion clin­ic.

In a 2-1 de­cision Tues­day, a three-judge pan­el of the U.S. Court of Ap­peals for the 5th Cir­cuit ruled un­con­sti­tu­tion­al a 2012 law re­quir­ing phys­i­cians per­form­ing more than 10 abor­tions a year to be cer­ti­fied in ob­stet­rics and gyneco­logy and have ad­mit­ting priv­ileges at a nearby hos­pit­al.

The court is the same one that up­held a sweep­ing Texas law in­clud­ing the same pro­vi­sion, which has already closed more than a third of the abor­tion clin­ics in the state since it was passed last sum­mer.

Jack­son Wo­men’s Health Or­gan­iz­a­tion, the sole clin­ic that of­fers leg­al abor­tions in Mis­sis­sippi, has two pro­viders, neither of whom has ad­mit­ting priv­ileges. The clin­ic was un­able to ob­tain ad­mit­ting priv­ileges after the law was passed, but a fed­er­al judge put the re­quire­ment on hold while the court pro­ceed­ings con­tin­ued.

Tues­day’s rul­ing af­firms the Dis­trict Court’s in­junc­tion. If the law were ul­ti­mately up­held, the clin­ic would have been forced to close, leav­ing wo­men in the state without a single abor­tion pro­vider.

The Mis­sis­sippi law is part of a wave of an­ti­abor­tion reg­u­la­tions that have closed or threatened to close large num­bers of clin­ics in sev­er­al states. However, the im­pact in Mis­sis­sippi would ar­gu­ably be the most ex­treme, as the state has only one pro­vider.

The Ap­peals Court judges cited this dif­fer­ence as reas­on for strik­ing down the law, say­ing that for­cing wo­men to travel out­side state lines to have an abor­tion con­sti­tuted an un­due bur­den on their con­sti­tu­tion­al right es­tab­lished in Roe v. Wade.

“Mis­sis­sippi may not shift its ob­lig­a­tion to re­spect the es­tab­lished con­sti­tu­tion­al rights of its cit­izens to an­oth­er state,” said Judge E. Grady Jolly, writ­ing for the ma­jor­ity. “Such a pro­pos­al would not only place an un­due bur­den on the ex­er­cise of the con­sti­tu­tion­al right, but would also dis­reg­ard a state’s ob­lig­a­tion un­der the prin­ciple of fed­er­al­ism — ap­plic­able to all 50 states — to ac­cept the bur­den of the non-del­eg­able duty of pro­tect­ing the es­tab­lished fed­er­al con­sti­tu­tion­al rights of its own cit­izens.”

Sup­port­ers of the law ar­gue it is meant to pro­tect wo­men’s health, and that in­di­vidu­als seek­ing an abor­tion could travel to an­oth­er state.

However, Gov. Phil Bry­ant has been more straight­for­ward about his in­ten­tion in sign­ing the law, say­ing he wants to “make Mis­sis­sippi abor­tion-free.”

States have the right to reg­u­late abor­tions, to the ex­tent that they do not cre­ate an “un­due bur­den” for wo­men seek­ing the pro­ced­ure, but what con­sti­tutes a bur­den is a ma­jor point of con­ten­tion.

A dif­fer­ent three-judge pan­el on the same Ap­peals Court ruled that the Texas anti-abor­tion law was con­sti­tu­tion­al be­cause there will still be some clin­ics provid­ing abor­tions in the state, al­though wo­men will have to travel far great­er dis­tances in some cases to ac­cess them.

The court views Tues­day’s opin­ion in Mis­sis­sippi as con­sist­ent with the Texas rul­ing, giv­en the dif­fer­ent cir­cum­stances.

Ad­voc­ates on both sides say a split in Ap­peals Court de­cisions — with two dif­fer­ent fed­er­al courts dis­agree­ing — would make it more likely that these kinds of abor­tion reg­u­la­tions make it to the Su­preme Court as soon as next ses­sion.

Chal­lenges to sim­il­ar laws are still pending in Alabama and Wis­con­sin.

“It’s our view that these laws are un­con­sti­tu­tion­al in any state,” said Ju­lie Rikel­man, lit­ig­a­tion dir­ect­or at the Cen­ter for Re­pro­duct­ive Rights, and the per­son who ar­gued the case against the Mis­sis­sippi law. “There’s no med­ic­al jus­ti­fic­a­tion; states should not be able to re­strict a con­sti­tu­tion­al right based on pre­text.”

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 5133) }}

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
3 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
7 REPUBLICANS ON STAGE
Carly Fiorina Will Not Be Allowed to Debate on Saturday
2 days ago
THE LATEST

ABC News has announced the criteria for Saturday’s Republican debate, and that means Carly Fiorina won’t be a part of it. The network is demanding candidates have “a top-three finish in Iowa, a top-six standing in an average of recent New Hampshire polls or a top-six placement in national polls in order for candidates to qualify.” And there will be no “happy hour” undercard debate this time. “So that means no Fiorina vs. Jim Gilmore showdown earlier in the evening for the most ardent of campaign 2016 junkies.

Source:
×