Texas Abortion Ruling Isn’t a Big Victory for Wendy Davis

The decision blocks some regulations from taking effect this week, but the fight is far from over, both for Texas and for pro-choice activists.

State Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Ft. Worth, contemplates her 13-hour filibuster after the Democrats defeated a Texas anti-abortion bill in June.
National Journal
Brian Resnick and Matt Berman
Add to Briefcase
Brian Resnick and Matt Berman
Oct. 28, 2013, 12:04 p.m.

A fed­er­al judge ruled Monday that Texas’s re­stric­tions in a new abor­tion law are un­con­sti­tu­tion­al, a de­cision that will pre­vent them from tak­ing ef­fect Tues­day, as sched­uled. On its face, the rul­ing is a big boost for Wendy Dav­is and oth­er op­pon­ents of Texas’s reg­u­la­tions. But just be­cause one judge says the rules won’t fly doesn’t mean that an­oth­er won’t over­turn him. Texas At­tor­ney Gen­er­al Greg Ab­bott is ex­pec­ted to ap­peal.

Dis­trict Judge Lee Yeak­el’s de­cision stated that the reg­u­la­tions vi­ol­ated the rights of abor­tion doc­tors and would re­strict ac­cess for wo­men to abor­tion clin­ics. Of the law, he wrote, it “does not bear a ra­tion­al re­la­tion­ship to the le­git­im­ate right of the State in pre­serving and pro­mot­ing fetal life or a wo­man’s health and, in any event, places a sub­stan­tial obstacle in the path of a wo­man seek­ing an abor­tion of a non­vi­able fetus and is thus an un­due bur­den to her.”

The law would have closed a third of the abor­tion clin­ics in the state, as doc­tors in abor­tion clin­ics would have to be as­so­ci­ated with a hos­pit­al with­in 30 miles. But as The Wall Street Journ­al ex­plains it, “Many Texas hos­pit­als are likely to deny ad­mit­ting priv­ileges for busi­ness reas­ons or be­cause of polit­ic­al and mor­al ob­jec­tions to abor­tions.” Also, Yeak­el wrote that the state did not provide suf­fi­cent evid­ence for its po­s­i­tion — that hav­ing an abor­tion doc­tor as­so­ci­ated with a hos­pit­al im­proves pa­tient out­comes in the case of an emer­gency. After all, hos­pit­als can­not deny pa­tients. “The court con­cludes that ad­mit­ting priv­ileges have no ra­tion­al re­la­tion­ship to im­proved pa­tient care.”

The court or­der also blocks re­stric­tions on abor­tion drugs. Ac­cord­ing to the Hou­s­ton Chron­icle, Yeak­el said those re­stric­tions

may not be en­forced against any phys­i­cian who de­term­ines, in ap­pro­pri­ate med­ic­al judg­ment, to per­form a med­ic­a­tion-abor­tion us­ing the off-la­bel pro­tocol for the pre­ser­va­tion of the life or health of the moth­er….

There­fore, the court con­cludes that the med­ic­a­tion-abor­tion pro­vi­sion of House Bill 2 is an un­due bur­den on those wo­men for whom sur­gic­al abor­tion is, in the sound med­ic­al opin­ion of their treat­ing phys­i­cian, a sig­ni­fic­ant health risk dur­ing the peri­od of preg­nancy fall­ing 50 to 63 days LMP.

Two com­pon­ents of the bill — a ban on abor­tions after 20 weeks of gest­a­tion and a stand­ards re­quire­ment for clin­ics — are not be­ing chal­lenged. The ban will go in­to ef­fect Tues­day.

Texas state Sen. and, as of Septem­ber, Demo­crat­ic gubernat­ori­al can­did­ate Wendy Dav­is launched a 11-hour fili­buster of the state’s abor­tion bill in June. The fili­buster, which per­sisted in the face of tough rules (Dav­is couldn’t wander off top­ic, for in­stance), helped to delay the pas­sage of the bill un­til a spe­cial le­gis­lat­ive ses­sion in Ju­ly. It also helped to rock­et her to na­tion­al polit­ic­al fame and set up her cam­paign for gov­ernor.

After the bill was passed, Planned Par­ent­hood, along with oth­er wo­men’s health groups, filed suit.

The judge in the case, Yeak­el, was ap­poin­ted to the court by then-Pres­id­ent Bush in 2003. This isn’t the first time Yeak­el has weighed in on an abor­tion-re­lated is­sue. In April 2012, he ruled that a law that would ban Planned Par­ent­hood from re­ceiv­ing state funds was un­con­sti­tu­tion­al.

But that case could be in­struct­ive: Just a few months later, in Au­gust, a 5th Cir­cuit Ap­peals Court re­versed Yeak­el’s rul­ing, free­ing Texas to im­pose the fund­ing ban.

This fight is far from over, both for Texas and for pro-choice act­iv­ists. The state’s at­tor­ney gen­er­al is ex­pec­ted to file an ap­peal to the 5th Cir­cuit Court of Ap­peals, which could take months to go through. While the re­stric­tions are on hold right now, there’s no reas­on to think they’re cer­tain to stay that way.

What We're Following See More »
WANTS ANSWERS ON CLINTON EMAIL PROBE
Senate Judiciary Sends Questions to Loretta Lynch
23 hours ago
THE LATEST
ARE “OPEN TO NEGOTIATION”
Sens. Paul, Cruz, Johnson and Lee Oppose Senate Health Care Bill
1 days ago
THE LATEST

The four Senators released a joint statement, saying in part, "There are provisions in this draft that repreesnt an improvement to our current health care system, but it does not appear this draft as written will accomplish the most important promise we made to Americans: to repeal Obamacare and lower their health care costs."

Source:
TRUMP SUGGESTED THERE WERE TAPES
No Comey Tapes
2 days ago
THE LATEST

Trump tweeted Thursday afternoon, "With all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea whether there are "tapes" or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings."

Source:
DEVELOPING
Senate Healthcare Bill In Trouble?
2 days ago
BREAKING
BETTER CARE RECONCILIATION ACT
Senate Republicans Unveil Healthcare Bill
2 days ago
BREAKING
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login