Contact Us   •   Donate   •   Site Guide   •   Site Map   •   Search
NARAL Pro-Choice America
Larger/Smaller Text
Printer Friendly

News

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 12, 2005

NARAL Pro-Choice America Network files Legal Brief Opposing Unconstitutional Abortion Law

Ayotte case poses significant risks for women's health

Washington, DC - NARAL Pro-Choice America and 25 of its state-based affiliates filed an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court" brief, in support of the women's health clinics involved in the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England.

NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire advised the legislature, in accordance with clear Supreme Court precedent, that no restriction on the right to choose may endanger a woman's health. Yet the legislature deliberately passed a law that could endanger women's health. In the brief, NARAL Pro-Choice America and its affiliates argue that the Court should follow its own precedents and declare the law unconstitutional. The Court is expected to hear the case November 30.

"The Supreme Court should declare this ill-constructed law unconstitutional based on clearly set legal precedent. If the Court upholds this law, it will endanger women's health in New Hampshire and across the country," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. "With such a closely divided Supreme Court, the implications for a woman's right to choose are ominous. The health exception for women has been a cornerstone of reproductive law since the Court ruled on Roe v. Wade in 1973."

Keenan said two other federal courts have struck down the 2003 law because New Hampshire legislators failed to include a constitutionally required health exception.

"The New Hampshire Attorney General disregards the Constitution's longstanding requirement that women's health must always be protected when the state regulates abortion. She denies that a provision protecting minors' health in an emergency is required -- truly a remarkable assertion, when 36 states have correctly understood that common sense and the Supreme Court's many precedents require such an exception," Keenan said. "If the Court rules in favor of New Hampshire, then we could see an onslaught of anti-choice legislation flood our state houses. Pro-choice Americans are watching closely to see whether the Court continues its role as the guardian of women’s health provisions." 

Contact:
Ted Miller, 202.973.3032

Make a donation

Choice Action Center  |  Issues  |  News  |  About Us  |  Support Us  | 
Need Information About a Pregnancy?  |  Contact Us  |  Get Email Updates  |  Privacy Policy

© Copyright 2008 NARAL Pro-Choice America® & NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation®. All rights reserved.

Powered by Convio