Friends, The new Alliance Alert Daily Digest is finally here! You can subscribe to the daily e-mail here: Subscribe to our mailing list * indicates required Email Address * First Name * Last Name *
SCOTUS Blog: The Supreme Court took off of its docket, and thus will not decide, a plea by the state of Oklahoma to revive a law that restricts doctors’ use of drugs rather than surgery to perform an abortion. In a one-sentence order, the Court dismissed as “improvidently granted” the case of Cline, et al., v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice (docket 12-1094).
LifeNews: Americans United for Life president Charmaine Yoest recently said, “Oklahoma legislators acted to curb the dangerous misuse of life-ending drugs by requiring physicians to follow FDA protocols that better protect women’s lives and health. But once again, the Oklahoma Supreme Court put itself between the abortion industry and the U.S. Supreme Court by reverse-engineering statutory language to invalidate the Legislature’s common-sense regulation of life-ending drugs. The Court’s decision is a thinly-veiled attempt to shield its original opinion from further review.” “This kind of legal maneuvering now exposes women to the increased dangers of life-ending drugs when misused by abortion profiteers,” she added.
Lyle Denniston reports at SCOTUS Blog: The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled today that a 2011 state law — now awaiting review by the Supreme Court — is so broad that it would outlaw all abortions done with medications, rather than surgery. The state court was answering two questions sent to it by the Justices last June, when they agreed to hear a case with state officials seeking to defend the law’s constitutionality (Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice).
Lyle Denniston at SCOTUS Blog: The new case, Horne v. Isaacson (docket 13-402), is from Arizona, and the 2012 law at stake would prohibit a woman from having an abortion at twenty weeks or later in pregnancy — three or four weeks before the commonly accepted point at which a fetus could survive if born alive (that is, the point of fetal “viability”).
SCOTUS Blog: Coming out of Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice is the key abortion-related question of regarding an Oklahoma law pertaining to abortion-inducing drugs. This already on SCOTUS’ docket, but is pending a response from the Supreme Court of Oklahoma, according to The New York Times. What has occurred with Cline, and what is the issue, though? Here’s a general overview.
US Supreme Court to Hear Public Prayer, Abortion, ‘Obamacare’ Cases as New Term Begins | Christian Post
Christian Post: However, Joel Oster, senior legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, who represented Greece in the court at the time, told The Christian Post earlier that the decision contradicted past Supreme Court rulings on the matter. “The U.S. Supreme Court already upheld the practice of prayers before deliberative bodies,” he said. “This opinion by the Second Circuit effectively undermines the Supreme Court’s opinion and places several roadblocks and obstacles for a town to permit legislative prayers.”
Cline symposium: Another correction of the abortion distortion coming? | Casey Mattox at SCOTUS Blog
Louise Melling of the ACLU at SCOTUS Blog: But no one should be fooled. In the Court, as in the state legislatures, it is the incremental cuts, not bans, that in reality define the fate of abortion restrictions and thus abortion. Here the question, “Can a state ban a method or methods of abortion,” will be the proxy for the much more significant question, “In which direction will the Court take its decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey?”
“Cline symposium: Oklahoma law could force doctors to provide substandard medical care to women using medications to end a pregnancy” | SCOTUS Blog
Jennifer Blasdell and Nancy Stanwood at SCOTUS Blog: At stake in Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice is the ability of a woman to use medications to end a pregnancy.
Helen Alvare at SCOTUS Blog: In sum, Cline has the potential to further delineate the contents of the “undue burden” standard in abortion cases, and also to highlight the degree to which states may scrutinize abortion providers’ medical practices in a context in which the providers would prefer to increase their freedom to offer more RU-486 abortions.
OKCFox.com: It’s being called the biggest abortion decision since Roe v. Wade, and it’s happening right here in Oklahoma. The fate of an Oklahoma law that “restricts” or “prevents” the way Oklahoma doctors prescribe an abortion-inducing medication will soon be decided in the Supreme Court. The case of Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, involving the drug (formerly known as RU-486) now known as Mifeprex, could affect abortion laws across the country.
O. Carter Snead at SCOTUS Blog: Failure to reverse the Oklahoma Supreme Court here would reinstate the “abortionist’s veto” that Justice Kennedy rightly rejected in Gonzales and constrict the state’s authority to pursue laws meant to promote the health and welfare of its people.
National Review: The Supreme Court’s term doesn’t officially begin until the first Monday in October, but in the New York Times last week Linda Greenhouse gave her opening argument to Justice Anthony Kennedy in Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, a case challenging Oklahoma’s regulation of the abortion drug mifepristone, or RU-486.
Linda Greenhouse at NY Times: But he’s also the author of the 5-to-4 opinion that upheld the federal ban on so-called partial birth abortion back in 2007, and abortion-rights advocates have viewed with something close to dread the prospect that he could play a similarly decisive role in the Supreme Court’s next abortion case. That case has arrived. It’s understandable if you haven’t heard of Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice . . . | SCOTUS Blog case page: Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice
One News Now: Numerous organizations have submitted briefs for the court’s consideration, including Alliance Defending Freedom. ADF senior counsel Steven H. Aden tells OneNewsNow that it filed the brief on behalf of physicians who practice obstetrics and gynecology in the state: “The chemical abortion drug RU486 should be administered pursuant to the Food and Drug Administration’s own protocol, and that’s what Oklahoma is trying to do,” says Aden.
LifeNews: “One of the government’s top priorities should be to protect the health and safety of its citizens, and that’s all that Oklahoma is trying to do,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Steven H. Aden. “Abiding by FDA protocols clearly does not place an undue burden on access to abortion, and the medical specialists that have filed this brief confirm this. Oklahoma is right to place the health and safety of its citizens above the bottom line and ideology of abortionists.”
Edmond Sun: State Rep. Randy Grau filed a Friend-of-the-Court brief Wednesday with the Oklahoma Supreme Court. The brief was signed by 83 state lawmakers in support of the state of Oklahoma’s right to place safety requirements on the RU-486 drug that terminates pregnancy.
U.S. Supreme Court Orders Oklahoma Supreme Court to Answer Two Certified Questions Regarding State Regulation of Medicated Abortion | Christian Post
Christian Post: In response to the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s schedule for briefing these certified questions and the invitation to submit a “friend of the court” brief in that court by the Oklahoma Attorney General, who has also filed his own brief, a group of Oklahoma doctors specializing in obstetrics and gynecology, represented by attorneys from JC-LOLP and the Alliance Defending Freedom, yesterday submitted their brief.
Alliance Defending Freedom and the Jubilee Campaign’s Law of Life Project filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the Oklahoma Supreme Court Tuesday on behalf of doctors specializing in obstetrics and gynecology who support a state law pertaining to chemical abortions.
One of the government’s top priorities should be to protect the health and safety of its citizens, and that’s all that Oklahoma is trying to do. The unapproved use of RU-486 has been traced to many side effects and the deaths of several women.
SCOTUS Blog: Edging closer to a new review of state power to restrict the right to abortion, the Supreme Court on Thursday added to its docket a case from Oklahoma, while indicating that it would not move ahead until it gets some answers from that state’s Supreme Court. If the case does go forward to a full-scale ruling by the Justices, it could be a test of state authority to ban abortions performed with medicines, rather than surgery.
Alliance Defending Freedom and the Family Research Council filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Supreme Court Monday in support of an Oklahoma law that requires doctors prescribing the abortion drug RU-486 to use only the FDA required protocol for the drug.
ENIDnews.com: Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision by the Oklahoma Supreme Court that invalidated a state anti-abortion statute. | Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice