Arkansas’ Abortion Ban Over-Turned by Tyrannical Judge

[Lifesite News] A federal judge continued to block three pro-life laws in Arkansas from going into effect because they are “unconstitutional” and would cause “irreparable harm” for women seeking abortions.

Judge Kristine Baker of the Eastern District of Arkansas ruled again against an 18-week abortion ban, another law banning abortion based upon a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome, and a third law requiring abortionists to have OB/GYN certifications. The 18-week abortion law bans abortion except in cases of rape, incest, and medical emergency.

Baker said in her ruling that the three laws “cause ongoing and imminent irreparable harm to the plaintiffs and their patients,” and “the harms to women who are unable to obtain abortion care as a result of (the acts) are irreparable.”

The Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Planned Parenthood had sued Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge and other state officials in June, arguing that the three measures are unconstitutional.

Baker addressed the 18-week ban in particular in her decision, suggesting she would ultimately rule in favor of the pro-abortion plaintiffs based upon the reasoning that the ban is unconstitutional, CNN reported.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1973 in Roe v. Wade that the Constitution had an implicit right to privacy that included the right for women to obtain an abortion, states could put greater restrictions on abortion after an unborn baby reached viability.

Roe v. Wade defined viability at 28 weeks. However, in 1992’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey, this was revised to 24 weeks, given trends in science since Roe had meant later and greater chance of survival for children who are born pre-term.

The standard for viability has continued to trend earlier than 24 weeks since then, and more babies are surviving pre-term birth when given adequate medical attention.

“The Court concludes that, at this stage of the proceedings and on the record evidence currently before the Court, plaintiffs are likely to prevail on their argument that (the ban) unconstitutionally restricts pre-viability abortions and, therefore, is facially unconstitutional,” Baker wrote in her decision.

To continue reading, click here.

[Editor’s Note: This article was written by Lisa Bourne (headline changed by P&P) and first published at LifeSite News]


Subscribe to our mailing list!

Pulpit & Pen now offers subscribers a weekly newsletter. The newsletter will contain links to all our posts delivered conveniently to your inbox. Occasionally, subscribers will receive exclusive updates not available on the website. To subscribe, simply enter your email address below.

Enter your email address below…

Also, please add newsletter@pulpitandpen.org to your contacts to ensure that your newsletter doesn’t go into your spam folder. (If you don't see an email confirmation from us right away, please check your spam folder.)


Contact Us Donate

Facebook Comments

You may also like...