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

March-18-05

Kansas Attorney General Accused of Violating Gag Order

Two abortion clinics have accused Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline of violating a gag order barring him and the clinics from discussing publicly Kline's attempts to obtain the unedited medical records of 90 women and girls who sought late-term abortions in 2003. Kline is accused of holding press conferences and giving interviews on his investigation while the gag order was still in place. According to the Associated Press, the Kansas Supreme Court agreed tp the clinics’ request last week to lift the gag order following Kline’s violation. The clinics have announced that they plan to inform the patients whose unedited medical records are being requested.

The Washington Post called Kline’s subpoena of these medical records the strongest move yet by a state official against providers of late-term abortions. Attorneys for the two clinics targeted by Kline have told the Kansas Supreme Court that “the logical and natural progression of this action could well be a knock on the door of a woman who exercised her constitutional right to privacy, by special agents of the attorney general who seek to inquire into her personal, medical, sexual or legal history,” the Washington Post reports.

Kline, who has said that he would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned, began his attempt to force the release of private medical files in secret last fall, claiming that he needs these records in order to prosecute child rape. However, Kline has also subpoenaed the records of women over the age of 16, which is the age of legal consent in the state. The Attorney General is refusing to give the clinics more details about the investigation, with the state’s lawyers saying that doing so would be akin to “arguing that suspects in a criminal investigation should be allowed to oversee the investigation,” according to the Washington Post.

In 2004, then US Attorney General John Ashcroft sought abortion records from hospitals and Planned Parenthood clinics in order to prosecute those who had violated the abortion procedures ban passed by Congress in 2003. Several federal judges ruled against Ashcroft’s action, and the abortion procedures ban has since been ruled unconstitutional three times.

Media Resources: Washington Post 3/15/05; Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report 3/15/05; Feminist Daily News Wire 2/13/04, 9/8/04, 3/2/05


© 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

4/18/2014 Texas Hospitals Revoke Admitting Privileges to Abortion Providers - Reproductive health access in Texas continues to vanish in the wake of HB 2, the omnibus anti-abortion bill that, among other things, requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges in order to keep their clinics open. . . .
 
4/18/2014 Dartmouth President Calls For Changes In Wake of Federal Sexual Assault Investigation - Dartmouth College President Phil Hanlon gave a powerful speech Wednesday night calling for significant changes on campus in light of its high rates of sexual assault, high-risk drinking, and discriminatory social scene. "Darmouth's promise is being hijacked by high-risk and harmful behaviors, behaviors that are hurting too many of our students, dividing us as a community and distracting from our important work of teaching and learning," Hanlon said. . . .
 
4/17/2014 Federal Court Permanently Blocks North Dakota's Extreme 6-Week Abortion Ban - A federal district court permanently blocked one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the nation yesterday, calling it "invalid and unconstitutional." The North Dakota law, HB 1456, directly challenged Roe v. . . .