[1]LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)–A 1998 Kentucky law requiring a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion was ruled constitutional Dec. 21 by U.S. District Judge John G. Heyburn II in Louisville.
The law, which also requires women to receive a state-produced pamphlet about pregnancy options, has not been enforced to date, pending the judge’s decision in a trial earlier this year prompted by an ACLU lawsuit challenging its constitutionality.
Heyburn, in a ruling of 20-plus pages, described the law as “a reasonable measure to ensure adequate informed consent in all cases of abortion.”
A Louisville lawyer, Kim Greene, who represented the doctor at the forefront of the ACLU case, told The Kentucky Post Dec. 22 that no immediate decision had been made on appealing Heyburn’s ruling. If the case is appealed, Heyburn may be asked to keep the 24-hour waiting period on hold while the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati decides whether to hear the case.
Heyburn said in his order he will hold a court session in the first week in January to make his ruling final and discuss how the law should be enforced, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported.
In his ruling, Heyburn described the Kentucky law as similar in part to a Pennsylvania law that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in 1992, thus permitting states to restrict abortion as long as they do not put an undue burden on women.
[2]“The state legislature wanted women seeking abortions to make a more informed and deliberate decision, no doubt hoping that they would opt for childbirth instead,” Heyburn acknowledged in his ruling. “The court concludes that distributing these pamphlets is a reasonable measure to ensure adequate informed consent in all cases of abortion.”
The waiting period would make abortions “marginally more expensive and more difficult to obtain,” Heyburn also acknowledged. Concerning the size of the group of women affected by such marginal factors, Heyburn wrote, “It is only speculation to suggest that the statute prevents a large fraction of the defined group from exercising their right to choose.
“Simply put, the 24-hour informed consent period … does not fundamentally alter any of the significant pre-existing burdens facing poor women who are distant from abortion providers.” Heyburn noted, “Plaintiffs have not shown a greater undue burden on women seeking an abortion in Kentucky.”
Sen. Katie Stine, R.-Fort Thomas, who drafted the law when she was a member of the Kentucky House of Representatives, told The Post she was “absolutely ecstatic with Judge Heyburn’s ruling.”
“[Heyburn] uses the word ‘reasonable’ a lot in referring to the measure. I’ve always felt it was a reasonable approach,” Stine said. “What’s wrong with giving people more time and information to consider such a momentous decision?”
Margie Montgomery, executive director of The Kentucky Right to Life Association in Louisville, told the newspaper, “It is a common sense law that seeks to protect the health and well-being of women by providing them with factual information regarding the health risks of abortion, fetal development and other alternatives.
“Kentucky Right to Life Association is confident that when women are provided with the truth about abortion, they will choose alternatives that are compatible with their dignity as women, and that also respect the dignity of the child growing in the womb,” Montgomery said.
Beth Wilson, director of the Kentucky ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, was quoted by The Post as saying, “It’s a sad day for the women of Kentucky.”
The ACLU had argued that the 24-hour waiting period would create hardships for women who have to make two trips to Lexington and Louisville, the only cities with abortion providers, according to The Post. Low-income, young women and women in abusive relationships would be especially affected, the ACLU argued, and delays could pose additional health risks for those women.
The ACLU noted that the Lexington abortion clinic is only open on Thursdays and Fridays, and a woman who sought an abortion on a Friday might have to wait six days for the procedure, The Post recounted.
Dan Sullivan, a doctor and private health-care consultant who does work for the state, testified, however, that only 2.5 percent of the women between the ages of 15 and 44 do not live within a 100-mile radius of an abortion clinic, including ones that are outside the state’s borders, the newspaper reported.
Mark Guilfoyle, one of two lawyers from Crestview Hills who represented the state Cabinet for Health Services, told The Post that the Kentucky law “is designed to protect women.”
“They will be fully informed and have time to think,” Guilfoyle said.
Several other states also have informed consent laws, while voters in Colorado rejected a 24-hour waiting period in the November elections.
–30–
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)–A 1998 Kentucky law requiring a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion was ruled constitutional Dec. 21 by U.S. District Judge John G. Heyburn II in Louisville.
The law, which also requires women to receive a state-produced pamphlet about pregnancy options, has not been enforced to date, pending the judge’s decision in a trial earlier this year prompted by an ACLU lawsuit challenging its constitutionality.
Heyburn, in a ruling of 20-plus pages, described the law as “a reasonable measure to ensure adequate informed consent in all cases of abortion.”
A Louisville lawyer, Kim Greene, who represented the doctor at the forefront of the ACLU case, told The Kentucky Post Dec. 22 that no immediate decision had been made on appealing Heyburn’s ruling. If the case is appealed, Heyburn may be asked to keep the 24-hour waiting period on hold while the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati decides whether to hear the case.
Heyburn said in his order he will hold a court session in the first week in January to make his ruling final and discuss how the law should be enforced, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported.
In his ruling, Heyburn described the Kentucky law as similar in part to a Pennsylvania law that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in 1992, thus permitting states to restrict abortion as long as they do not put an undue burden on women.
“The state legislature wanted women seeking abortions to make a more informed and deliberate decision, no doubt hoping that they would opt for childbirth instead,” Heyburn acknowledged in his ruling. “The court concludes that distributing these pamphlets is a reasonable measure to ensure adequate informed consent in all cases of abortion.”
The waiting period would make abortions “marginally more expensive and more difficult to obtain,” Heyburn also acknowledged. Concerning the size of the group of women affected by such marginal factors, Heyburn wrote, “It is only speculation to suggest that the statute prevents a large fraction of the defined group from exercising their right to choose.
“Simply put, the 24-hour informed consent period … does not fundamentally alter any of the significant pre-existing burdens facing poor women who are distant from abortion providers.” Heyburn noted, “Plaintiffs have not shown a greater undue burden on women seeking an abortion in Kentucky.”
Sen. Katie Stine, R.-Fort Thomas, who drafted the law when she was a member of the Kentucky House of Representatives, told The Post she was “absolutely ecstatic with Judge Heyburn’s ruling.”
“[Heyburn] uses the word ‘reasonable’ a lot in referring to the measure. I’ve always felt it was a reasonable approach,” Stine said. “What’s wrong with giving people more time and information to consider such a momentous decision?”
Margie Montgomery, executive director of The Kentucky Right to Life Association in Louisville, told the newspaper, “It is a common sense law that seeks to protect the health and well-being of women by providing them with factual information regarding the health risks of abortion, fetal development and other alternatives.
“Kentucky Right to Life Association is confident that when women are provided with the truth about abortion, they will choose alternatives that are compatible with their dignity as women, and that also respect the dignity of the child growing in the womb,” Montgomery said.
Beth Wilson, director of the Kentucky ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, was quoted by The Post as saying, “It’s a sad day for the women of Kentucky.”
The ACLU had argued that the 24-hour waiting period would create hardships for women who have to make two trips to Lexington and Louisville, the only cities with abortion providers, according to The Post. Low-income, young women and women in abusive relationships would be especially affected, the ACLU argued, and delays could pose additional health risks for those women.
The ACLU noted that the Lexington abortion clinic is only open on Thursdays and Fridays, and a woman who sought an abortion on a Friday might have to wait six days for the procedure, The Post recounted.
Dan Sullivan, a doctor and private health-care consultant who does work for the state, testified, however, that only 2.5 percent of the women between the ages of 15 and 44 do not live within a 100-mile radius of an abortion clinic, including ones that are outside the state’s borders, the newspaper reported.
Mark Guilfoyle, one of two lawyers from Crestview Hills who represented the state Cabinet for Health Services, told The Post that the Kentucky law “is designed to protect women.”
“They will be fully informed and have time to think,” Guilfoyle said.
Several other states also have informed consent laws, while voters in Colorado rejected a 24-hour waiting period in the November elections.
–30–
A low res (BP) photo has been posted in the BP Photo Library at www.bpnews.net. Photo title: UNBORN CHILD AT 14 WEEKS.