Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

January-21-14

Federal Court Strikes Down North Carolina Ultrasound Law

A federal district court permanently blocked a 2011 North Carolina law that required abortion providers to perform an ultrasound and describe the images to the patient, even if the woman objected.

U.S. District Court Judge Catherine C. Eagles ruled that the "speech-and-display" provision of the law violated the First Amendment. State lawmakers had acknowledged that the ultrasound law was designed to persuade women not to obtain abortions. "Requiring a physician or other health care provider to deliver the state's content-based, non-medical message in his or her own voice as if the message was his or her own constitutes compelled ideological speech and warrants the highest degree of First Amendment protection," wrote Judge Eagles.

"The court's ruling makes clear that politicians cannot use physicians as mouthpieces for their political agenda, and reaffirms the constitutional right of ever woman to decide for herself whether to continue or end a pregnancy," said Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights which brought the challenge along with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation, and Planned Parenthood on behalf of several North Carolina physicians.

North Carolina may appeal the district court's decision. Mandatory ultrasounds have been challenged in Texas and Oklahoma with mixed results. In July 2013, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory (R) signed into law several other extreme anti-abortion measures which require abortion clinics to meet the same requirements as ambulatory surgical centers, eliminate abortion coverage under state employee insurance plans, ban sex-selective abortions, and allow health care providers to refuse to participate in abortion-related care.

Media Resources: Center for Reproductive Rights Press Release 1/17/14; Feminist Newswire 7/30/13, 11/13/13, 2/16/12


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

5/5/2015 Sen. Reid Promises to Filibuster "Fast Track" for the TransPacific Partnership - Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid has promised to delay efforts to push through the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal until the Senate first deals with two stalled bills that may soon expire. Reid says that the two measures, an infrastructure bill on highway funding, and reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), are "very complicated issues," that require the Senate's attention "before we even deal with [the Trans-Pacific Partnership]." The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a massive free trade agreement currently being promoted by the Obama Administration, has been heavily criticized by humanitarian groups, environmental groups, and medical groups. . . .
 
5/4/2015 Report Released by Sen. Gillibrand Shows Underreporting of Military Sexual Assault - A new report released by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) this morning shows the Department of Defense (DOD) is grossly under-reporting the number of sexual assault crimes in the US military, particularly those occurring on military bases. . . .
 
5/1/2015 House Reverses DC Law Banning Reproductive Health Discrimination by Employers - The US House of Representatives voted Thursday night to overturn a Washington, DC, law that makes it illegal for employers to retaliate against employees who use their insurance to cover procedures like in-vitro fertilization or abortion and contraception like birth control pills and IUDs for themselves, their spouses, or their children. The District's council passed the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act last year. . . .