By Dave Andrusko
It’s important to remember that long before there was abortionist Kermit Gosnell, convicted of three counts of first-degree murder, there were plenty of abortionists who were so outrageous even their Abortion Industry brethren tried to separate themselves from them.
As good (actually bad) as example as you are likely to ever find is Steven Brigham. He is, alas, back in the news again.
You have to remember that Brigham has lost his medical license in multiple states. Currently he is fighting to regain his license in New Jersey which has been temporarily suspended.
Writing for The [New Jersey] Star-Ledger, Susan K. Livio told her readers that last Friday, Brigham’s attorney asked a judge “to consider his client a target of ‘selective enforcement’ who thought he was following accepted medical practices.”
That was the second half of the lead sentence.
The first half explained why his license had been suspended: “for starting late-term abortions in his South Jersey office and sending five women to Maryland to finish the procedure.”
(Last year, The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Marie McCullough put it more bluntly in another of her thorough investigative stories of Brigham: “Three years ago, New Jersey suspended it [his license] when he was caught – after a critically injured patient went to the police – doing what he was disciplined for in the mid-1990s: starting late-term abortions in New Jersey and finishing them in another state.”)
Why would Brigham do that? “The Attorney General’s Office claimed Brigham had used the two-state practice to evade New Jersey law prohibiting doctors from performing abortions after the 14th week of a patient’s last menstrual period outside a hospital or other licensed medical facility,” Livio explained.
To no avail Deputy Attorneys General Joshua Bengal and Gezim Bajrami asked Administrative Law Judge Jeff Masin “to consider Brigham’s history in New York, where his license was revoked for similar offenses in 1994, and in Pennsylvania, where two clinics were cited and shut down after the doctor voluntarily placed his license on ‘permanent inactive status,’” Livio wrote.
Masin’s explanation? Brigham has yet to give up his Pennsylvania license (the case is still in ligation) and because (Livio explained) “it wouldn’t be fair to consider his New York revocation because the New Jersey judge disagreed with that ruling in 1996 and Brigham kept his license.”
However, Brigham’s attorney, Joseph Gorrell, did bring up Brigham’s Pennsylvania track record, Livio wrote, “but only as evidence of selective enforcement. . .to explain why all of this really happened.’” (Gorrell alluded to Brigham being an “easy target for pro-life advocates.”)
Saying that it was too late in the trial to bring up such a defense, Masin said no. “We would have to have a full-scale hearing. I don’t see any basis for allowing that at all,” Masin said.
According to Livio, Masin said he expected to rule “shortly.” Masin’s decision “would then be the subject of a medical board hearing to decide whether to adopt the findings.”