iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

South Dakota Abortion Law: Federal Judge Grants Planned Parenthood Preliminary Injunction

DIRK LAMMERS   06/30/11 09:40 PM ET   AP

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Saying it would humiliate and degrade women, a federal judge on Thursday afternoon granted Planned Parenthood's preliminary injunction to prevent South Dakota's new abortion law from taking effect while it's being challenged in court.

The law, which would have taken effect Friday, requires women seeking abortions to face a three-day waiting period – the nation's longest – and undergo counseling at pregnancy help centers that discourage abortion.

The lawsuit says the law violates a woman's constitutional right to abortion established under the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling.

In her written ruling, U.S. District Chief Judge Karen Schreier said that Planned Parenthood demonstrated that the law and its specified provisions are "likely" unconstitutional, and there's a public interest in protecting a woman's constitutional right to choose an abortion and her right to free speech.

Schreier said requiring women to attend pregnancy help centers would create an undue burden.

"Forcing a woman to divulge to a stranger at a pregnancy help center the fact that she has chosen to undergo an abortion humiliates and degrades her as a human being," she wrote. "The woman will feel degraded by the compulsive nature of the Pregnancy Help Center Requirements, which suggest that she has made the 'wrong' decision, has not really 'thought' about her decision to undergo an abortion, or is 'not intelligent enough' to make the decision with the advice of a physician."

Schreier let stand a small part of the law allowing pregnancy help centers to register with the state, but she suspended all the sections that require women to consult with those centers.

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley said the state has four options on how to proceed: appeal the preliminary injunction, continue to argue the merits of the case, discuss a potential settlement or do nothing.

He said he's reached out to legislative leaders and the governor's office but he can't yet say what course of action the state will take.

"At this point, I need to fully read the decision and discuss it with the attorneys involved in the case, the governor and legislative leadership," Jackley said Thursday evening.

Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard said the preliminary decision was not a surprise.

"I believe everyone agrees – no matter what their stance on abortion – that it's a laudable goal to reduce abortions by encouraging consideration of other alternatives," Daugaard said in a statement. "The three-day waiting period called for in HB1217 gives women time to reflect and make good choices."

Supporters of the measure say the Planned Parenthood clinic in Sioux Falls gives women little information or counseling before they have abortions done by doctors flown in from out of state. They say the bill would help make sure women are not being coerced into abortions by boyfriends or relatives.

Leslee Unruh, founder of the Alpha Center pregnancy help center and supporter of the law, said that Schreier's decision was not a surprise and her organization plans to intervene on Friday.

"We're in it for the long haul," Unruh said after the ruling Thursday.

Mimi Liu, an attorney for Planned Parenthood who argued for the injunction, said Alpha Center is not a party to the case and she wasn't worried about its plan to intervene.

"This is a case between Planned Parenthood and the state," Liu said.

Sarah Stoesz, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, said the law passed by the legislature and signed by Daugaard was an overreach that represents a blatant intrusion by politicians into difficult decisions that women and families sometimes need to make.

Voters rejected statewide ballot measures in 2006 and 2008 that would have banned most abortions in the state, measures that sought to provoke a court challenge of Roe v. Wade.

"The current legislature and governor are clearly out of step with the people of South Dakota," Stoesz said. "I think the judge recognized that."

Stoesz said Planned Parenthood is very gratified with the decision, and the organization looks forward to the day when the law is permanently overturned.

Planned Parenthood, which operates South Dakota's only abortion clinic in Sioux Falls, filed the lawsuit on May 27.

South Dakota's law says an abortion can only be scheduled by a doctor who has personally met with a woman and determined she is voluntarily seeking an abortion. The procedure can't be done until at least 72 hours after that first consultation, establishing the longest waiting period in the nation.

Before getting an abortion, a woman also will have to consult with a pregnancy help center to get information about services available to help her give birth and keep a child. The state will publish a list of pregnancy help centers, all of which seek to persuade women to give birth.

Planned Parenthood says the law would intrude on women's right to make personal decisions about medical treatment and require women seeking abortions to receive counseling from unlicensed and unaccredited pregnancy centers that are often religiously motivated.

About half the states, including South Dakota, now have 24-hour waiting periods. No other state requires women to visit pregnancy crisis centers before getting abortions.

The South Dakota Legislature has passed several other measures restricting abortions in the past decade.

A 2005 law passed by the Legislature already requires that women be told that an abortion will end the life of a human being. That law remains tied up in a court appeal.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Saying it would humiliate and degrade women, a federal judge on Thursday afternoon granted Planned Parenthood's preliminary injunction to prevent South Dakota's new abortion ...
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Saying it would humiliate and degrade women, a federal judge on Thursday afternoon granted Planned Parenthood's preliminary injunction to prevent South Dakota's new abortion ...
Filed by Adam Goldberg  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 966
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (13 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dbos
Single payer universal health insurance agent
08:59 PM on 07/05/2011
Remove any and all federal facility including military bases from states who pass these socially destructive laws.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lisalulu
I stand for Planned Parenthood.
08:18 PM on 07/05/2011
I love federal judges. IN KS and SD - all in one week.

SD has spent over $500,000 on unconstitutional laws including 2 State Wide referendums!

Hunt, Leslie Unrue and husband - Alpha Pregnancy Center: focus on the living.

I love our local PP and its employees. I love ACLU and SD Healthy Families - and all advocates for PRIVACY.
01:36 PM on 07/02/2011
How can they say that an abortion procedure is even similar to a man getting a vasectomy or disposing of sperm? Can sperm by itself become a child? Doesnt it need the eggs from a women for a child to be created? Hmm...
Then the vasectomy argument. When a man gets a vasectomy, he is making a decision to no longer be able to procreate and the same goes for a hysterectomy. One is an outpatient procedure and one is far more complex. But neither includes an actual LIVING, BREATHING child like an abortion. They are trying to compare apples and oranges.

Vasectomy/Historectomy or disposing of sperm= The decision to no longer be able to reproduce.

Abortion= The decision to remove a living child.

Im sorry to disagree with all you folks out there that believe that its not a child till its born but i must. How can something with a beating heart, fingernails, and that can even recognize their mothers voice after 20 weeks not be a child? Well, the only way i can try and even begin to comprehend that is its the best way you know how to delude yourselves into believing that its OK to kill them. The less "humanity" they possess, the better, right?

Period!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Just My Thoughts 2011
Life's but a walking shadow
05:58 PM on 07/11/2011
You are so right! Well said.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
imokit
no longer has missing words!
04:51 PM on 07/14/2011
How can something which can't live without being inside another thing be a child? The children I know don't need other people's blood.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
4me2knw
Oh what tangled webs we weave.
01:34 PM on 07/02/2011
Stay away from me and my body, you old, white, disgusting neocons! That's part of the problem isn't it? You can't get any on your own so feel the need to control.
03:14 PM on 07/02/2011
As a Cristian i don't like abortions, as a father of an adopted child i don't like abortions, but as a man i don't believe me or any other man has a vote on the abortion issue. This is a woman's issue. Until it's medically possible for us to carry a child to term, we should let women decide what they can and can't do with their bodies.
06:31 PM on 07/11/2011
From a woman thank you very much. Men in this country seem to think they can still control woman. It takes two to make a baby. If men are so sure a woman they impregnated is going to abort it they should have used a condom to start with.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lauren Lamourine
02:42 AM on 07/02/2011
Why are there people always want to think a woman, who is maybe ten weeks along, just wakes up and says "You know what? Nah-- I don't want to have a kid", and that is why she chooses to have an abortion.
Here's a better idea of what to do with the money going into "counseling"-- stock the high schools and colleges with condoms. It would not increase the sexual activity of students.

Back earlier in the year, one South Dakota congressman tried to add the killing of a person who "intends any harm to a fetus" as justifiable homicide. That government has also tried to outlaw abortion completely, including the use of a "morning after" pill for rape victims. Luckily, it has always been beaten by the voters themselves.
photo
ProgressivesArePatriots
Le laissez-faire, c'est fini
01:24 AM on 07/02/2011
I'm glad! A federal a judge with common sense! It's worth noting that Planned Parenthood is first and foremost a CHARITY. They do more to PREVENT abortions from ever becomming necessary than any narrow-minded, self-righteous, judgmental, maliciously misogynist conservative EVER has!

There's a lot more to the issue of abortion than simply the medical procedure itself. We need to look at all the sociological and the ECONOMIC factors especially that are associated with the issue. Conservatives like to act as restricting womens' access to perfectly legal reproductive health care is all about cracking-down on irresponsible behavior- which is really none of their business to begin with, but is also a COMPLETE LIE!

Many women would love to have a child but understand that the astronomical cost of prenatal health care combine with the cost of birthing a child at a hospital would be financially devastating. Perhaps if conservatives were actually pro-life & not simply irresponsibly pro-birth, I'd be willing to take them more seriously on the issue. THEN there's the issue of educating our youthe properly on sexual matters, however, here's yet ANOTHER issue where conservatives tend to be unreasonable.

Abstinence only sex education is naive irresponsible. Yet the consequences of such inadequate sex education is born out by the YOUTH.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LadyXoc
04:52 PM on 07/01/2011
Could one open a "pregnancy help" counseling center to help a woman decide on abortion? Good reasons for it: rape, incest, health of the mother, abnormal fetus, mother lacks skills to raise a child, untreated drug addiction, and poverty. There may be more, but these spring at once to mind.
05:55 PM on 07/02/2011
A good abortion provider gives information about anything the woman needs. Sometimes the needs are simple & somtimes extremely complex. We refer for prenatal care, adoption, genetic counseling, & social services quite routinely. We don't want women to be pregnant when they feel they cannot give birth. It's the same as pediatricians etc., they don't want our kids to be sick, but sometimes our kids do get sick & need them. Thanks for your logical approach.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
1murillo
Can't be neutral on a moving train - Zinn
04:34 PM on 07/01/2011
The "waiting period" line of thought could be taken to its logical extreme: Any medical procedure that might affect a person's life should have a three-day waiting period and state-sanctioned "counseling" to try to talk the prospective patient out of the medical procedure.
janefi
It's always about The Constitution.
05:20 PM on 07/01/2011
You mean like donating blood...or bone marrow...or a kidney....part of a liver...etc..etc..etc.
photo
compajuan049
Meat & potatoes lefty, freethinker/internationalis
03:46 PM on 07/01/2011
Next thing you know they will be mandating background checks and "three week waiting periods" for underwear and short short purchases!

This is not just Big Government! It's a black hole government brought to you by the Xtian'macists and the "Right 4Lifers" mob!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:06 PM on 07/01/2011
"The three-day waiting period called for in HB1217 gives women time to reflect and make good choices." Does the governor really believe that women wake up in the morning, pee on a stick, grumble about the results, then jump in their cars and drive to the only clinic in the state without even stopping to have their morning coffee? Seriously, how chowder-headed is this guy? The decision to termin ate is not easy to make, ever, for any woman. She thinks about it, talks it over with important people in her life, agonizes over the consequences of her choice (no matter what she decides) and seeks professional medical advice. To even insinuate that women cannot make good choices for their own lives without the "help" of strangers with a political agenda is insulting to the women being legislated and indicative of the low intellectual qualities of the people who think so little of them.

Personally, I look at a.b.o.r.t.i.o.n the same way I look at same-sex marriage: Don't like it? Don't get one!
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
1murillo
Can't be neutral on a moving train - Zinn
04:37 PM on 07/01/2011
#1
janefi
It's always about The Constitution.
05:21 PM on 07/01/2011
But ....PP and gay marriage do have something in common.....they do cost the federal taxpayers money.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Russell Masingale
weary I am of the Astroturf.
02:01 AM on 07/02/2011
how does gay marriage cost money? because republicans will fight to the death in court using federal money to defend the undefendable, without ever even looking out for their principles. small gov, anybody?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lauren Lamourine
02:48 AM on 07/02/2011
PP does much more than abortions, and still doesn't cost as much as the welfare. Plus, gays are paying taxes too.
02:54 PM on 07/01/2011
What is it about Republicans not understanding that, constitutional questions aside, waiting periods are degrading to women?

"I'm sure your desire to have an abortion is just you being irrational and hormonal. Little woman, why don't you take some time to actually think things through, then come back and see us."

If I were a woman, I would find that more horribly offensive than I could possibly express.
janefi
It's always about The Constitution.
05:22 PM on 07/01/2011
Maybe women should start instituting a three day waiting period for having sex....see how the guys like that one. Can you say blue balls on HP?
Political Piggy
Free comments and ideas are worth every penny paid
01:42 PM on 07/01/2011
Because abortion is an "impulse buy"? I'll take this magazine, this pack of gum, and oh - look, abortions are on sale...I think I'll have one!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lachihuahua
somewhere between land and sky
01:16 PM on 07/01/2011
Thank goodness for the injunction. I hope it sticks. (nn)
11:45 AM on 07/01/2011
This is America where church and state are supposed to be separate. How come these people all claim to be constitutionalist, but they still seek to control women with their religious beliefs. The republicans/tea party are out of control with this scary nonsense. They are supposed to be for smaller government, yet they keep making more laws that take away our rights to chose. Sooner or later people are going to have to wake up and stop this take over of the country by the extreme right, who are finances and owned by big corporations.
janefi
It's always about The Constitution.
05:24 PM on 07/01/2011
First off..name a member of the Tea Party...then prove that person is in the back pocket of any corporation.

Hey...guess what...PP is a big evil corporation too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dean77
"There's only one God, mam."
11:44 AM on 07/01/2011
I guess it would mean how long you were going pre-meditate the murder.