A federal judge on Friday ruled that an admitting privileges requirement for abortion providers in an Alabama law (HB 57) is unconstitutional, the AP/Wall Street Journal reports (AP/Wall Street Journal, 3/25).
The decision follows oral arguments in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, a Supreme Court case challenging similar provisions in Texas' omnibus antiabortion-rights law (HB 2) (Yurkanin, Alabama Media Group, 3/25).
Background
The law mandates that abortion clinics must meet the same building standards as ambulatory surgical centers. The law also requires that abortion providers have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Alternatively, clinics can arrange a written agreement with a local physician who has admitting privileges.
Three Alabama abortion clinics -- Reproductive Health Services in Montgomery and Planned Parenthood Southeast health centers in Birmingham and Mobile -- filed a lawsuit challenging the law in 2013. A federal judge temporarily blocked the law shortly after the lawsuit was filed, later issuing an opinion that struck down the admitting privileges requirement as applied to the plaintiffs in August 2014. The state appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The 2014 ruling did not apply to the sole clinic in Tuscaloosa, the West Alabama Women's Center. The clinic closed in January 2015 because it could not meet the admitting privileges requirement or contract with a physician who has admitting privileges. In July, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the ACLU of Alabama filed a federal suit against the law on behalf of the West Alabama Women's Center and Willie Parker, a physician who provides abortion care at the clinic.
In August 2015, U.S. District Court Judge Myron Thompson issued a restraining order against the law and followed up with an opinion stating that the law was unnecessary to protect women's health. The restraining order was to remain in place until a final ruling (Women's Health Policy Report, 12/18/15).
Latest ruling
Thompson on Friday ruled that the provision is unconstitutional, stating that it would shut down clinics in the state and "impose a substantial obstacle to a woman's choice to undergo an abortion" (Wall Street Journal, 3/25).
He wrote, "The [admitting privileges] requirement would make it impossible for a woman to obtain an abortion in much of the State ... It is certain that thousands of women per year -- approximately 40 percent of those seeking abortions in the State -- would be unduly burdened."
Reaction
Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, praised the ruling. "We applaud the court for protecting women's access to safe, legal abortion in Alabama," she said.
Richards added, "As a health care provider, we've seen the grim consequences for women when politicians put safe abortion out of reach. When a similar law in Texas went into effect, our health centers were flooded with calls from women who weren't sure where they could now turn for care. If the Supreme Court upholds the Texas law, this could become a reality for women across the country" (Alabama Media Group, 3/25).
Separately, Staci Fox, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast, said, "Politicians passed this law in order to make it impossible for women in Alabama to get abortions, plain and simple." She added, "This victory ensures that women in Alabama can make their own private health care decisions without the interference from politicians" (AP/Modern Healthcare, 3/26).
