April, 29 2022, 11:06am EDT
For Immediate Release
Legal Challenges Filed to Block Two Extreme Oklahoma Abortion Bans
A Texas-style copycat ban – passed today and would take effect as soon as the governor signs it.
WASHINGTON
Today, a coalition of Oklahoma abortion providers and a reproductive justice organization filed two separate challenges in state court to block two different abortion bans passed during the 2022 state legislative session. The six-week Texas-style abortion ban (S.B. 1503;challenge linked here), which passed today with no debate or questions allowed, would become effective immediately upon Gov. Kevin Stitt's signature. The other ban (S.B. 612; challenge linked here) would make providing an abortion a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and/or a $100,000 fine. The challenge to S.B. 1503 was filed directly in Oklahoma Supreme Court. The challenge to S.B. 612, filed in trial court, was added to an existing case challenging other abortion restrictions enacted in 2021 that are currently blocked.
S.B. 1503
S.B. 1503 creates a bounty-hunting scheme similar to Texas's S.B. 8, which encourages the general public to bring costly and harassing lawsuits against anyone they believe has provided or aided providing abortion in violation of the ban. Under this scheme, anyone who successfully sues an abortion provider, a health center worker, or any person who helps someone access an abortion after about six weeks in Oklahoma would be rewarded with at least $10,000. This scheme has successfully banned most abortions in Texas since it took effect in September 2021, with devastating effects on patients who are forced to flee the state for care, seek abortion outside the health care system, or carry pregnancies against their will.
Oklahoma will become the second state this year, after Idaho, to follow Texas's example in attempting to cut patients off from abortions at the earliest stages of pregnancy even while Roe still stands. In a move reserved for constitutional crises and other urgent situations, the challenge to S.B. 1503 was filed directly in Oklahoma Supreme Court. Petitioners requested an emergency order blocking the law from taking effect while litigation on the merits of the law proceeds. Although federal challenges to Texas's similar ban have been unsuccessful in blocking the law, there is significant precedent in Oklahoma state court to support plaintiffs' arguments for relief preventing this ban from going into effect.
S.B. 612
The other ban challenged today (S.B. 612) is a total ban on abortion in Oklahoma that is set to take effect in late summer 2022. S.B. 612 was signed into law by Gov. Kevin Stitt on April 12 and would make providing an abortion a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and/or a $100,000 fine. Today's filing seeks to add a challenge to S.B. 612 to an existing case - Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice v. O'Connor - which was filed in state court last year against a slew of abortion restrictions passed in 2021. Those included a ban on abortion as early as six weeks of pregnancy and a separate total abortion ban, which declared that providing any abortions qualifies as "unprofessional conduct" by physicians resulting in loss of licensure. All five laws challenged in the original suit are currently blocked. In today's filing, the plaintiffs requested to have S.B. 612 temporarily blocked like these other laws as litigation moves forward.
Quotes from attorneys and plaintiffs
"The Oklahoma Supreme Court has repeatedly found that the state legislature's extreme attempts to restrict abortion are unconstitutional, and these bans are some of the most extreme yet," said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. "We are asking the state courts to uphold the State Constitution and apply Oklahoma precedent to block these insidious abortion bans before they take effect. Oklahoma is a critical state for abortion access right now, with many Texans fleeing to Oklahoma for abortion care. These bans would further decimate abortion access across the South."
"To limit a person's freedom and autonomy is unconscionable and unconstitutional. Unless these abortion bans are stopped, Oklahomans will be robbed of the freedom to control their own bodies and futures," said Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "For more than seven months, Oklahoma abortion providers have taken in patients forced to leave Texas for essential care. The governor may joke about stopping people from crossing the Oklahoma border for abortion, but this is no laughing matter. Unless these bans are blocked, patients will be turned away, people seeking abortion will be unable to access essential care in their own communities, and their loved ones could be stopped from supporting them due to fear of being sued. We've told Oklahoma politicians loud and clear: keep your bans off our bodies. Today, we're taking the state to court to stop these bans from robbing Oklahomans of abortion access."
"These abortion bans will push abortion access out of reach for many communities who already face often insurmountable barriers to health care, including Black and brown communities, low-income communities, and people who live in rural areas," said Tamya Cox-Toure, co-chair, Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice. "These are the same communities who are most impacted by the maternal health crisis occurring in our country and in our state. The lawmakers who passed these bans do not care about access to healthcare, and we can't allow this law to take effect."
"As a physician who also provides abortions in Texas, I have seen firsthand the impact of a bounty-hunting scheme and abortion ban on patients and physicians," said Dr. Alan Braid, owner, Tulsa Women's Reproductive Clinic. "They are designed to threaten and intimidate physicians into not providing constitutionally protected health care, and force pregnant people to travel hundreds of miles to receive care. The pain this has caused in Texas is unfathomable, and I will fight alongside these other providers and advocates to prevent this law from taking effect in Oklahoma."
"Patients who are crossing state lines to get abortion services have the exact same question we do: why are their rights to make personal medical decisions less protected in one state than in another?" said Emily Wales, interim president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Great Plains. "Planned Parenthood Great Plains' providers have served thousands of Texans in the past seven months because of their state's harsh bounty-hunting scheme, and we have been proud to stand with them and provide essential, constitutionally protected abortion services. Now, rather than serving as a haven for patients unable to get care at home, Oklahoma politicians have made outcasts of their own people. With today's filings, we lift up the patients who will otherwise be unable to get care and ask the court to do its most essential function: honor the constitution and the individuals who need its protections."
If any of the abortion bans the legislature has passed in this session or the last take effect, abortion access will be almost entirely cut off for the thousands of patients who receive abortions in Oklahoma each year. The bans would also decimate abortion access for surrounding states: Since Texas's S.B. 8 took effect, Oklahoma clinics have reported huge upticks in Texas patients, resulting in weeks-long wait times. Planned Parenthood released data in February showing that, in the first four months after S.B. 8 took effect, more than half of the patients at its Oklahoma health centers were from Texas, compared to less than 10% in the prior year. Overall, during that period, these Oklahoma health centers saw a nearly 2500% increase in Texas patients.
The challenge to S.B. 1503 was filed in Oklahoma Supreme Court against the State of Oklahoma and all 77 state court clerks. The plaintiffs - Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice, Dr. Alan Braid, Tulsa Women's Reproductive Clinic, Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, and Planned Parenthood of Arkansas & Eastern Oklahoma - are represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Blake Patton.
Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice v. O'Connor (to which the challenge to S.B. 612 was added today) was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Dechert LLP, and Blake Patton on behalf of the Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice, Tulsa Women's Reproductive Clinic, Dr. Alan Braid, Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, and Planned Parenthood of Arkansas and Eastern Oklahoma.
The Center for Reproductive Rights is a global human rights organization of lawyers and advocates who ensure reproductive rights are protected in law as fundamental human rights for the dignity, equality, health, and well-being of every person.
(917) 637-3600LATEST NEWS
"Not a 'Joke.' It's Fascism": Trump Says He Wouldn't Mind Journalists Getting Shot
The Republican nominee also said during the same rally in Pennsylvania that he "shouldn't have left" the White House after losing the 2020 election.
Nov 04, 2024
During a rally on the final Sunday before the presidential election, Republican nominee Donald Trump told an audience gathered in the battleground state of Pennsylvania that he wouldn't mind if a gunman shot through the group of reporters covering the event.
After discussing the protective glass surrounding him, the former president said a would-be assassin "would have to shoot through the fake news" to get to him.
"I don't mind that so much," Trump said, drawing laughter and applause from his supporters. "I don't mind."
Watch:
Trump says he doesn't mind if someone shoots the press.
He repeatedly encourages violence against anyone who challenges his narrative.
That's what a dictator does — and Trump's Supreme Court gave him immunity to do whatever he wants if re-elected.
Votepic.twitter.com/W0dUWro2g9
— Melanie D'Arrigo (@DarrigoMelanie) November 3, 2024
Journalist Jeff Sharlet wrote in response that during his time covering "the fascism beat," he's met "men who've been itching for that encouragement, who openly fantasize about beating or killing reporters."
"It's not a joke," Sharlet wrote. "It's fascism."
Trump has long reveled in attacking members of the press, vilifying them as "the enemy of the people" and directing the ire of his supporters in their direction. Kash Patel, a Trump confidant who's expected to get a senior national security post if the former president wins Tuesday's election, suggested earlier this year that a second Trump administration would go after "the people in the media" with criminal or civil charges, underscoring the threat the Republican nominee poses to press freedom.
Facing backlash over Trump's latest attack on the press, his campaign issued an absurd statement claiming the former president was "actually looking out for [reporters'] welfare" by "stating that the media was in danger."
The Atlantic's Helen Lewis noted Sunday that "journalists are only some of the many 'enemies from within' whom Trump has name-checked at his rallies and on his favored social network, Truth Social."
Lewis continued:
He has suggested that Mark Zuckerberg should face "life in prison" if Facebook's moderation policies penalize right-wingers. He has suggested using the National Guard or the military against "radical-left lunatics" who disrupt the election. He believes people who criticize the Supreme Court "should be put in jail." A recent post on Truth Social stated that if he wins on Tuesday, Trump would hunt down "lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials" who had engaged in what he called "rampant Cheating and Skullduggery." Just last week, he fantasized in public about his Republican critic Liz Cheney facing gunfire, and he previously promoted a post calling for her to face a "televised military tribunal" for treason. In all, NPRfound more than 100 examples of Trump threatening to prosecute or persecute his opponents. One of his recent targets was this magazine.
Trump also said during Sunday's rally in Pennsylvania—where he and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris are in a dead heat—that he "shouldn't have left" the White House after losing the 2020 election.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'This Is What We're Funding': At Least 50 Children Killed in Israeli Strikes on Jabalia
"Civilians and civilian structures... must always be protected in accordance with international humanitarian law," said the head of UNICEF. "Yet these principles are being flouted over and over again."
Nov 03, 2024
The United Nations children's agency on Saturday condemned the Israel Defense Forces' "indiscriminate strikes on civilians in the Gaza Strip" after at least 50 children were reportedly among those killed in attacks on Jabalia refugee camp in the northern part of the enclave.
Northern Gaza has been under siege since early October, when Israel resumed its attacks there, claiming it was targeting Hamas militants.
The current situation in northern Gaza has been called "apocalyptic" by leading humanitarian groups in recent days, with women and children making up the majority of the hundreds of people killed, and Israel imposing a near-total blockade on humanitarian aid.
Now, said Catherine Russell, executive director of the U.N. Children's Fund (UNICEF), "the entire Palestinian population in North Gaza, especially children, is at imminent risk of dying from disease, famine, and the ongoing bombardments."
In addition to the attacks on residential buildings this weekend in Jabalia, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that an attack on a healthcare center in Gaza City injured at least six people, including four children. The facility was participating in a polio vaccination drive, the second round of inoculations for children across Gaza.
"The Sheikh Radwan primary healthcare center in northern Gaza was struck today while parents were bringing their children to [get] the life-saving polio vaccination in an area where a humanitarian pause was agreed to allow vaccination to proceed," WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said. "These vital humanitarian-area-specific pauses must be absolutely respected. Ceasefire!"
Russell said the vehicle of a UNICEF staffer who was working on the vaccination campaign was attacked by "what we believe to be a quadcopter while driving through Jabalia—Elnazla."
The staff member was not injured, but Russell said "the attacks on Jabalia, the vaccination clinic, and the UNICEF staff member are yet further examples of the grave consequences of the indiscriminate strikes on civilians in the Gaza Strip."
"Civilians and civilian structures, including residential buildings, as well as humanitarian workers and their vehicles, must always be protected in accordance with international humanitarian law," said Russell. "Yet these principles are being flouted over and over again, leaving tens of thousands of children killed, injured, and deprived of essential services needed for survival."
The Gaza Health Ministry reports that at least 43,341 people have been killed in Gaza and at least 102,105 have been injured since Israel began its assault on the enclave more than a year ago in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack. Women and children make up most of those killed, even as Israel and the United States, the largest international supporter of the IDF, have insisted the military is targeting Hamas.
"How can this inhumane situation be tolerated by the Biden-Harris administration?" asked Nina Lahoud, who has served as a special adviser and peacekeeping officer at the U.N., after the death toll among children in Jabalia over the weekend was reported. "How many more Palestinian kids need to die to take urgent action?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
'It's the Abortion Ban': Final Iowa Poll Shows Harris Leading Trump 47-44
Rights advocates were energized by the "gold standard" poll results, but called on progressives to continue working to turn out voters.
Nov 03, 2024
Political observers expressed shock Saturday evening as the Des Moines Register released its final poll before Election Day showing Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris leading Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump by three points.
Harris was supported by 47% of respondents compared to 44% who backed Trump.
The newspaper's poll, conducted by pollster J. Ann Selzer, is widely regarded as the "gold standard" survey of voters in the state and has been recognized as "predicting" numerous election results in Iowa and giving a potential preview of how candidates could fare in other Midwestern states with similar demographics.
Progressive advocates cautioned against placing too much faith in a single poll—even a widely respected one—and urged Harris supporters to continue canvassing, phone-banking, and taking action to defeat Trump and the far-right MAGA movement.
But the unexpected result in a state that hasn't been considered a swing state in this election, and was widely assumed to be a Trump-supporting state, led political observers to look closely at the poll, which showed significant shifts toward Harris among women.
Women aged 65 and older supported Harris over Trump, 63% to 28%, in the poll. Women who identify as political independents also backed her, 57% to 29%.
Overall, women in the state are backing Harris in the poll by a margin of 20 points, according to the survey.
Lyz Lenz, a journalist based in Iowa, said she believed the poll could be linked to one major change in Iowa since the last presidential election: the six-week abortion ban that took effect in July, banning abortion care after fetal cardiac activity can be detected. Similar abortion bans have been blamed for at least four deaths of pregnant women in Texas and Georgia.
"It's the abortion ban," said Lenz. "Women are furious."
Daniel Nichanian, editor-in-chief and founder of the digital magazine Bolts, said the result could preview losses for state Supreme Court justices who have upheld abortion bans in a number of states, including Iowa.
In 10 states this year, voters will make their voices heard on ballot initiatives regarding the right to abortion care. In traditionally red states including Kansas and Kentucky since Roe was overturned, people have voted to protect the right to obtain an abortion.
"It's the Dobbs election," said Helaine Olen of the American Economic Liberties Project. "The Iowa poll is just the latest proof."
Selzer herself told the BBC that many respondents talked about abortion rights.
"The people who say they're supporting Kamala Harris, the issue they say they're thinking about most is democracy, about half of them saying that's the most important thing," she said. "But then half of that, about 25% roughly, say abortion. And Iowa has one of the strictest abortion laws in place... and that may well have played a part in this."
Sean Trende, senior elections analyst for RealClearPolitics, said it would be "foolish to dismiss [Selzer's] poll," but cautioned election watchers against abandoning "all of [their] prior views about the state of the race."
Dan Pfeiffer, a former adviser to President Barack Obama and co-host of "Pod Save America," said one possible interpretation among several is that "Harris isn't really winning Iowa but the poll is capturing late-stage momentum that bodes well for Wisconsin, Michigan, [and] Pennsylvania."
Advocacy group Indivisible on Sunday morning advised supporters to "send this Iowa poll to all your group chats. Then, sign up to talk to some voters. With your help, we're going to win this thing in two days."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular