Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Abortion laws set for return to court today

Judge asked for 2nd look in light of justice’s opinion

- NEAL EARLEY

A federal judge in Little Rock today is set once again to rule on whether to halt the implementa­tion of a set of Arkansas abortion restrictio­ns.

With four laws placing strong regulation­s on abortion in Arkansas possibly taking effect this week, the American Civil Liberties Union continued its legal fight Monday to stop that from happening.

U.S. District Court Judge Kristine G. Baker will weigh whether to block implementa­tion of those laws, as she has in the past.

In its court filing Monday, the ACLU, representi­ng Dr. Frederick Hopkins and Little Rock Family Planning Services, where he works, argued that if the laws took effect it could stop scheduled abortion procedures from taking place this week.

“Access to abortion care is already severely limited in Arkansas, and these laws would push reproducti­ve care even further out of reach,” said Holly Dickson, executive director of the ACLU of Arkansas, in a statement. “We won’t stand by while politician­s try to punish, stigmatize, or deny people the freedom to make their own personal decisions about their

families and their health.”

The plaintiffs represente­d by the ACLU are seeking a temporary restrainin­g order and will seek a preliminar­y injunction, Dickson said, both of which would block the laws from taking effect.

Today’s hearing comes a week after the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals cleared the way for those laws to take effect, dissolving a Baker ruling that had blocked their implementa­tion.

ACLU officials indicated last week that the organizati­on would again petition Baker to prevent the laws from taking effect or take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In court filings Monday, Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge said the plaintiffs waited too long after the 8th Circuit decision to file a challenge.

“The supposed emergency justifying expedited amendment here is entirely of Hopkins’s own creation and amounts to the same sort of ‘procedural­ly suspect’ maneuverin­g that the Eighth Circuit criticized in a separate case involving Hopkins’s employer, Little Rock Family Planning Services, which he seeks to add as a plaintiff here,” Rutledge wrote on behalf of the state.

Rutledge’s office couldn’t be reached for comment Monday.

The latest legal challenge is part of a years-long fight against a set of abortion laws passed by the Arkansas Legislatur­e in 2017 — Acts 45, 1018, 733 and 603.

Act 45 bans dilation and evacuation, a common procedure for second-trimester abortions, while Act 1018 requires doctors to inform police if anyone 16 or younger gets an abortion. Act 733 prohibits sex-selective abortions and requires doctors to seek the medical records of any woman seeking an abortion who knows the sex of her fetus. Act 603 regulates the disposal of fetal remains.

Proponents of the laws say they are necessary regulation­s enacted by the Legislatur­e, while those against them argue they restrict a constituti­onally protected right.

After the Legislatur­e passed the laws, Baker issued a preliminar­y injunction blocking them from taking effect. Since then, the laws have been caught in a protracted legal fight as to whether they are constituti­onal.

In August, a three-judge panel of the 8th Circuit reversed Baker’s injunction, sending the case back to her courtroom to be reexamined in light of a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana law that would have left the state with one doctor able to perform abortions. If it had been upheld, the law would have banned doctors from providing abortions unless they had admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.

While that ruling was favorable to abortion proponents, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a concurring opinion that disagreed with the court majority’s reasoning for tossing the Louisiana law.

Roberts’ opinion said courts should not weigh a law’s benefits against the burdens it imposes on abortion access. Instead, Roberts said courts should weigh whether a law imposes a “substantia­l obstacle” to abortion.

Baker should reconsider the Arkansas case in light of Roberts’ concurring opinion, the 8th Circuit ruled.

In an August motion, asking the full 8th Circuit to rehear the matter and override the panel, the Arkansas plaintiffs argued that the panel erroneousl­y found that Roberts’ lone opinion overruled requiremen­ts establishe­d in a previous case.

“A single Justice’s commentary cannot rewrite a Supreme Court precedent,” the plaintiffs argued.

Last week, the 8th Circuit decided against reconsider­ing its ruling, clearing the way for the laws to take effect this week unless Baker again enjoins it.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States