Judicial

8th Circuit to hear state defend “Missouri Stands for the Unborn Act.”

By Dave Andrusko

At 10:00 am today, the full (“en banc”) 8th Circuit Court of Appeals  will take up the “Missouri Stands for the Unborn Act.” 

Judge Howard Sachs struck down two sets of provisions: one that prohibits abortions when the abortionist knows it is sought because the baby has Down syndrome; the second would prohibit most abortions at eight, 14, 18 and 20 weeks of gestation.  

Judge Sachs initially allowed the state to enforce the provision banning abortions based on a pre-natal diagnosis of Down Syndrome but later reversed his ruling. Schmitt’s office then appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed that ruling.
 
The decision by the full Eight Circuit to hear the case was surprising since neither the state Attorney General Schmitt, who had gone directly to the Supreme Court, nor the plaintiffs asked for a rehearing in front of the full eleven members, But it was very, very much welcomed.

The law is being defended on two separate tracks. One, with the 11 member 8th Court of Appeals, the second with an appeal directly to the Supreme Court.

Arguing on behalf of Attorney General  Eric General today will be Solicitor General John Sauer. 

As NRL News Today reported when the 8th Circuit panel voted to uphold Judge Sach’s injunction, a number of states passed laws against “discrimination-based” abortions, including those based solely on a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome, during the 2021 legislative session.

“Governors in Arizona and South Dakota recently signed such bills into law,” Jim Salter of the Associated Press reported. “Meanwhile, a federal appellate court said Ohio could begin to implement a 2017 law that has been on hold.

During the hearing, which took place via videoconferencing, Missouri State Solicitor General John Sauer told the three judge panel, “A radical reduction in the number of the class of people with Down syndrome would inflict an incalculable loss in our society.”  

Sauer also told Circuit Judges Jane Kelly, Roger Wollman, and David Stras, “People with Down syndrome are literally one generation away from complete elimination.”

Planned Parenthood attorney Claudia Hammerman maintained that HB 126  is incompatible with the 1992 Casey v. Planned Parenthood decision. Judge Kelly, who wrote the opinion and who was joined by Judge Wollman, “agreed with Planned Parenthood that the Down syndrome provision is a ban rather than a restriction,” according to Joe Harris of Courthouse News.

Judge David Stras, who concurred in part and dissented in part, began by noting that 

A preliminary injunction is hard to get, all the more so when the target is a democratically enacted state law.  The court makes it easy, however, by relaxing the rules to let Reproductive Health Services have one, despite its failure to show a “threat of irreparable harm” from Missouri’s Down Syndrome Provision. I would apply the usual rules and vacate the injunction.

Later Judge Stras elaborates on the key requirement of the law — that the abortionist has “knowledge that a Down Syndrome diagnosis is the sole reason for an abortion.” [Dr. Colleen McNicholas is a Planned Parenthood abortionist who testified against the law.]

Dr. McNicholas all but admits in her declaration that she has no idea how many women, if any, seek an abortion solely for that reason. Consider her words carefully. In addition to never identifying any women who sought abortions “solely because of” a Down Syndrome diagnosis, she goes on to say that “there is generally no medical need for [her], or any other physician providing abortion care at [the clinic,] to know a patient’s reason for seeking an abortion or to distinguish between one particular fetal diagnosis or another in order to provide compassionate, safe abortion care.” If there is no medical reason to ask, and no evidence that the reason for seeking an abortion is routinely volunteered, then the statute itself cannot create the “threat of irreparable harm.” 

Recent Posts

Election Day in Virginia Only Six Days Away!

By Olivia Gans Turner, President, Virginia Society for Human Life The candidates are traveling all… Read More

18 hours ago

Pro-abortion New York Times columnist warns Virginia Democrats that race is closer than anyone could have imagined—dead even!

By Dave Andrusko When Michelle Cottle of the New York Times cites chapter and verse… Read More

18 hours ago

Here is fact #9 of 40 Weeks 40 Facts

Week 9: By this point, the tiny one can start sucking its thumb. On that… Read More

18 hours ago

Poll show support widespread support for Texas’ Heartbeat Law

By Dave Andrusko No doubt much to the dismay of the pro-abortion Houston Chronicle, a poll “conducted… Read More

18 hours ago

Unable to move pro-abortion legislation, anti-life forces turn to the endorsing full slate of judicial candidates

By Maria V. Gallagher, Legislative/PAC Director, Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation Published reports indicate that pro-abortion forces… Read More

19 hours ago

Wisconsin State Assembly Passes Package of Pro-Life Bills

This afternoon, the Wisconsin State Assembly passed four pro-life bills that were previously passed in… Read More

19 hours ago