| Here's some bad news for Texas women: a federal appeals court overturned Judge Sam Sparks' decision to temporarily block the Texas sonogram law from going into effect while the trial over its legality occurs.
From Austin's CBS affiliate KEYE:
The federal appeals court in New Orleans says Texas can enforce an abortion law passed last year while opponents challenge it in court.
A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday overturned a district judge's temporary order against enforcing the law. The measure requires that doctors who perform abortions show sonograms to patients, describe the images and describe the fetal heartbeat.
The panel says U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks in Austin was incorrect to rule that doctors had a substantial chance to win their case.
So that's some bad news for Texas women and Texas doctors right there. The federal court is basically saying that doctors' free speech concerns in this regard don't matter. Through this bill, the Legislature is forcing doctors to say things that aren't medically necessary and thus turning doctors into ideological agents of the state's anti-woman agenda.
Sparks' injunction blocked the worst parts of the bill: enforcement of provisions requiring the display of the ultrasound, detailed description of the fetus, and intrusive disclosure requirements for women who were already victims of violent crimes. He did so under the assumption that the plaintiffs had a reasonable chance of winning their case. The 5th Circuit in turn said that Sparks had no right to assume that the plaintiffs would win against the State. The federal court linked the bogus sonogram law with other legislation requiring doctors to give "truthful, nonmisleading and relevant" information. You can read the 5th Circuit's order here (warning, opens PDF.) In the decision, Chief Judge Edith H. Jones wrote:
"'Relevant' informed consent may entail not only the physical and psychological risks to the expectant mother facing this 'difficult moral decision,' but also the state's legitimate interests in 'protecting the potential life within her.'"
So basically, the concern of anti-choice zealots in the Legislature over what a woman does with her own personal uterus is a good enough reason to force doctors to say and do things to their patients that the doctors don't find medically necessary or helpful. It's troubling reasoning.
By the way, is the Legislature going to pass something similar for men seeking vasectomies? I mean, the procedure consigns the little swimmers to a short, brutish existence in the newly truncated vas deferens. They won't ever have the chance to impregnate a woman or defile a sock! The horror, the horror! Someone, please think of the sperms!
Remember, we're not talking about the jelly-on-the-belly kind of sonogram. We're talking about an intrusive, transvaginal sonogram with a probe, per the slightly altered medical textbook illustration below:
By the by, apparently this graphic ruffled a few feathers amongst the anti-choice haterz, who had it pulled down from Imageshack. You can now download it here.
No word yet on how soon the sonogram law takes effect, or how it will be enforced. Remember, if doctors refuse to show the sonogram and do as this law entails, they could lose their license. The consequences of Texas Republicans' anti-woman agenda is dire.
Let's hope the plaintiffs prevail in their lawsuit seeking to block this law for good.
Previously on BOR:
|
