CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
January 14, 2014 |
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court is due to hear arguments on the constitutionality of a Massachusetts law that requires antiabortion protesters to stay 35 feet from abortion clinic entrances. If any group in America is going to be tormented by this conflict between free speech and abortion rights, it's the country's oldest civil rights organization. And yet, as usual, the American Civil Liberties Union gets it right. The buffer zone law is legal, says the ACLU. On its face, it neither prevents nor suppresses political expression, but rather finds a healthy balance between two seemingly irreconcilable rights.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 12, 2013 |
Rape insurance? Is that really a thing? Well, yes, though the anti-abortion legislators in Michigan who passed a law Wednesday making it necessary don't really call it that. They call it the “Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act.” From now on in Michigan, all public health insurance plans and most private ones will not be able to automatically include coverage for abortion services in their comprehensive policies. Women will have to purchase separate riders in order to be covered for any sort of elective abortion.
December 4, 2013
Re "Abortion clinics, not battle zones," Editorial, Dec. 2 As a family doctor who provides comprehensive reproductive healthcare, I am troubled that the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of Massachusetts' "buffer zone" law. I used to work at a family planning clinic in Massachusetts, where I witnessed the appalling intimidation tactics of protesters before the law requiring them to stay 35 feet away was enacted. I have seen protesters photographing patients' faces to post on anti-choice websites, screaming profanities at clinic volunteers and posing as staff falsely claiming that the clinic had been shut down by the health department.
December 2, 2013 |
A Massachusetts law that says "no person" may enter or remain in the 35-foot buffer zones established outside abortion clinics in the state has set off a controversial legal battle about the proper balance between the rights of speakers and the rights of those who must listen to them. Although several federal courts have upheld the law over the last few years, the Supreme Court has now agreed to review it. The high court should uphold it as well. The petitioners, including a grandmother in her 70s who stands outside abortion clinics hoping to talk to women on their way in, claim that the law is an impermissible infringement on their right to express their opinion.
November 21, 2013 |
It's disappointing that the Supreme Court denied a request to temporarily block an onerous new abortion law in Texas from taking effect while a federal appellate court determines whether the law is constitutional. The high court's decision could force as many as a third of the abortion clinics in Texas to close, creating a hardship for thousands of women seeking to terminate their pregnancies. The Supreme Court's decision was the wrong one. Now supporters of abortion rights must turn their attention back to the appellate court, which we hope will declare the underlying law unconstitutional.
November 12, 2013 |
WASHINGTON - For the second week in a row, the Supreme Court let stand a ruling that strikes down a major abortion regulation from Oklahoma, disappointing abortion foes who had hoped conservative justices would impose new limits on a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy. The justices Tuesday turned down Oklahoma's appeal seeking to revive a law that would have required pregnant women to undergo an ultrasound and hear about the fetus' size and possible heartbeat. Last week, the court dismissed the state's appeal of a second law that would have prohibited doctors from prescribing a combination of two drugs commonly used to induce abortion in the early weeks of pregnancy.