U.S. federal judge strikes down Texas abortion restriction
A federal judge on Friday threw out Texas’ new abortion restrictions that could have left women living in the second largest state in the US with only a handful of clinics.
US district judge Lee Yeakel sided with owners of abortion clinics from across the state who had asked the court to strike down part of a new state law requiring facilities to meet stringent operational standards, which opponents say are costly and unnecessarily burdensome. Officials who defended the law say its building and equipment regulations are meant to improve patient health and safety.
Yeakel considered whether the provision imposed an “undue burden” on those seeking abortions in Texas.
Another element of the Texas law, which has already taken effect, requires doctors who perform abortions to hold admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. The effect of this requirement has sharply reduced the number of abortion providers across the sprawling state.
Abortion has been a much-debated issue in the US in the decades since the supreme court affirmed a right to the procedure, and several states have tried to chip away at access under a variety of laws and proposed laws.
Texas attorney general Greg Abbott, a Republican who is the favorite to become governor, was expected to appeal Friday’s ruling.
In June 2013, a month before the state legislature passed the bill, there were 41 clinics in Texas that provided abortions, according to a study by the Texas Policy Evaluation Project at the University of Texas. By May 2014, there were only 22 clinics left where women could legally end their pregnancies.
Opponents of the law say implementing the disputed regulatory requirements, which were set to take effect on 1 September, would have forced even more clinics to shut down in the coming months, leaving just six or seven, and none in south or west Texas.
The proposal is part of a legislative trend to limit access to abortions by regulating facilities, providers and doctors. The added red tape forces clinics that can’t afford to make the upgrades to close. Moreover, hospitals often require doctors to admit a minimum number of patients before they’re granted admitting privileges.
Critics of such laws say it would be hard for doctors who work at abortion facilities to meet this minimum because they rarely have to admit patients to the hospital as complications from the procedure are rare.
The judge’s decision is the latest in a series of conflicting court decisions that have the potential to significantly restrict access to abortions, especially throughout the US south.
In early August, a federal judge ruled that an Alabama law requiring doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at hospitals was unconstitutional on grounds that it would place an “undue burden” on women. The law would have forced three of the states five abortion clinics to shut their doors.
