This week the pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List) filed an amicus brief in June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Gee, a major abortion case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. The case involves a Louisiana law that requires abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of where they perform an abortion. The law was introduced in 2014 by Democratic State Representative Katrina Jackson and passed by overwhelmingly bipartisan majorities in both the Louisiana House and Senate. Oral arguments will be heard on March 4 of this year with a decision expected by the end of June or early July.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony List, commented:
“The Supreme Court’s tragic 2016 Hellerstedt decision struck down reasonable, sorely needed standards to protect women who undergo abortion, including requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. The abortion industry needs this oversight, having shown no interest or ability to self-regulate and defend women from so-called doctors like Kermit Gosnell, James Pendergraft, Steven Chase Brigham, George Klopfer, and more. In revisiting this issue, we hope to see the Court respect the right of state lawmakers to prioritize women’s health and safety. The protection of women and girls is worth more than the abortion industry’s profits.
“Our brief in this case shows why the Louisiana law is both commonsense and constitutional. The response to another brief in this case, filed by pro-life Members of Congress, from Democratic presidential candidates including Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Michael Bloomberg, underscores their extremism on abortion. They advocate unregulated abortion, without limits, up until birth, and ignore the wellbeing and safety of women. The sub-standard level of care that is the norm in abortion facilities must be kept in check – abortionists don’t deserve an exception from putting the health of women first.”
Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI), the education and research arm of SBA List, and its coalition partner Concerned Women for America (CWA) have also filed an amicus brief in the June Medical case. That brief provides detailed information and analysis of abortion cases filed between the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and the present. This research indicates that abortionists are filing a much higher percentage of these cases than women themselves. The brief reads in part:
“Survey results reveal that women have consistently challenged abortion-related laws related to public funding and laws requiring parental, spousal, or judicial consent prior to performance of an abortion, while showing little or no appetite for attacking laws aimed at providing women with more information on abortion and its alternatives; safer, cleaner abortion facilities; and ethical, competent providers.”
REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.
On the brief filed by CLI and CWA, CLI President Chuck Donovan commented:
“The extensive historical analysis in this brief makes clear the significant changes that have occurred since 1976 in who is challenging pro-life laws. To block this law would benefit the abortion industry and put women at increased risk. We seek to protect lives in the womb and women as well, as does our partner in this brief, Concerned Women for America.”
Teresa Collett, J.D., Director of the University of Saint Thomas Prolife Center, added:
“The Prolife Center has created a database of all federal abortion cases from 1973 through 2019 to compare how often women sued to overturn abortion laws compared to abortion providers. The annual average of women filing these cases is 2.1, while providers average 9.1 per year. This stark contrast speaks volumes, and is echoed in the fact that abortionists, not women themselves, are fighting this current Louisiana law.”