“From Roe v. Wade to today’s case, Texas again could be pivotal in changing the law of the land on abortion, as much needed health and safety standards are debated following evidence of abortion industry profiteering at women’s expense,” said AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest.
WASHINGTON, D.C. (11-13-15) – Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest said that the Supreme Court’s decision to consider health and safety standards in abortion clinics “is the right choice given all that we know now about the dangers of abortion for women and their unborn children. The Texas case Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole presents a unique and much-needed opportunity to further educate the Court and the American public about the reality of ‘back-alley’ abortions in America and to expose the abortion industry’s widespread and callous disregard for women’s health and safety. For more than 15 years, AUL has been a leader in calling for stronger protections for women through commonsense health and safety standards laid out in AUL’s Women’s Protection Project.”
She continued: “Court watchers will appreciate that Texas again is at the forefront of the continuing national debate over abortion. In January 1973, the Supreme Court struck down Texas’ prohibition on abortion in Roe v. Wade, unleashing an extreme abortion-on-demand agenda that has claimed more than 50 million children and left millions of American women at the mercy of an under-scrutinized, inadequately regulated, and profit-driven abortion industry. Now another Texas abortion law has presented the Court an opportunity to strike a decisive blow for women’s health and safety and to ensure that abortion providers – who are often more interested in maintaining profitability than in safeguarding women’s health and safety – comply with medically appropriate standards of care.”
Over just the last 6 years, more than 150 abortion providers in at least 30 states and the District of Columbia (DC) have faced investigations, criminal charges, administrative complaints, and/or civil lawsuits related to the provision of abortions or have been cited for violating state laws governing the operation of abortion clinics.
In light of documented abortion industry abuses, legislators responded with health and safety standards. Currently, 29 states regulate (to widely varying degrees) abortion facilities, and only 6 of these states (including Texas) require abortion clinics to meet the same health and safety standards as facilities performing other outpatient surgeries.
Dr. Yoest also noted that court watchers expect that the Court will clarify the appropriate standard of review to be applied by courts when reviewing abortion laws, the correct application of the “undue burden” standard that it announced in Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992), and the proper deference to be given a state legislature’s determination that the provision of abortion requires competent, consistent, and comprehensive regulation and oversight – things that the abortion industry clearly does not prioritize or provide.
For more information on AUL’s amicus curie briefs filed in this case, click here.
For more information on the health risks of abortion for women, click here.
For more information on AUL’s model legislation, click here.
