The new Palmetto state law, supported by Republicans, which prohibits abortion at just six weeks pregnant has been blocked indefinitely through an injunction.
COLOMBIA, SC (CN) – In a victory for women’s health and civil rights advocates, a federal judge issued an injunction on Friday blocking South Carolina’s most recent abortion legislation that prohibits the procedure after a fetal heartbeat can be detected.
“We applaud the court’s decision to protect the people of South Carolina from this ban on abortion. Despite today’s temporary victory, we know that there is a long way to go, as the struggle to preserve access to abortion intensifies every day. Make no mistake: politicians across the country have made it clear that they will not stop until access to abortion is completely out of reach, ”said Alexis McGill Johnson, President and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, in a statement on Friday.
The move that would have banned abortion in the first six weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant, will not take effect unless there is a successful appeal against Friday’s decision.
The bill requires doctors to do ultrasound on women seeking an abortion. If the doctor detects a fetal heartbeat, abortion can only be performed if the mother’s life is in danger or if the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest.
Just a day after Republican Governor Henry McMaster enacted the bill last month, U.S. District Judge Mary Geiger Lewis issued a temporary restraining order suspending it for 14 days in response to an emergency motion filed by the Planned Parenthood South Atlantic and lawyers for Burnette Shutt McDaniel.
“It’s a fight that is worth having right there,” said McMaster last week. “The right to life is very important. This state is overwhelmingly in favor of this bill, and we will do whatever it takes, however long it is, to ensure that the right to life is protected in South Carolina. ”
Lewis, appointed by Barack Obama, granted an injunction against the law on Friday, as his TRO was about to expire.
“This case does not come close. In fact, based on the law, the court is unable to understand how another court could decide this issue differently from how this court has decided, ”wrote the judge. “As such, it is confident that no review court will conclude that the court abused its discretion by granting the plaintiff’s request for an injunction to suspend the execution of the unconstitutional act.”
Blasting state republican leaders, Lewis added that “it is nothing short of baffling when the defendants here make the fanciful, extravagant and misguided argument that the act is constitutional, although certainly, all the while knowing very well that it is not.”
In her opinion, the judge also took time to address the political divide often involved in issues such as abortion.
“However, the court is well aware that some may think that the policy of the president who appointed him, and not the law, not the sleepless nights of the court, and not his Herculean efforts to get it right, is a consideration and serves as a a barometer as to how this court would decide on the issue of abortion presented here, ”wrote Lewis in the 22-page opinion.
She added: “And, whether unwittingly or not, the media tends to feed this narrative, often looking at the name of the president who appointed the federal judge assigned to a politically divisive issue like this.”
Lewis wrote that the notion that judges take political positions based on who appointed them is misinformed at best and “highly offensive at worst”.
“We, judges, are not politicians in robes. Or, as Supreme Court President Roberts said, ‘We don’t have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing the best they can to make the same rights to those who appear before them, ”she added.
In his statement on Friday, McGill Johnson of Planned Parenthood noted that “since Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed to the Supreme Court, we have seen a violent attack of attacks, with more than 300 abortion bills filed.”
Republican Party lawmakers hope that these measures will be implemented if the United States Supreme Court, which has three judges appointed by Donald Trump, overturns the historic 1973 decision Roe v. Wade who legalized abortion until 22 to 24 weeks of pregnancy.
About a dozen Republican-led states have passed abortion restrictions similar to the last in South Carolina, including Georgia, Kentucky, Iowa, Ohio, Mississippi and Tennessee. Many of these so-called heartbeat bills have been challenged by civil rights organizations and ordered by courts.
Lewis noted in his opinion that Judge Barrett, the newest member of the high court, had publicly agreed with the sentiment previously mentioned by the President of Justice, Roberts, about the judges not being indebted to politicians.
She drew attention to the suggestion that “as the composition of the court has changed in recent years, the defendants’ likelihood that the newly constituted Supreme Court will rule in their favor in this matter is good.”
“As the theory evidently goes, the three most recently appointed Supreme Court judges are secretly conspiring to overthrow both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood vs. Casey because they are personally opposed to abortion, ”wrote the judge, referring to another historic abortion decision from 1992.
Lewis added: “The court easily rejects this notion. He has a much higher opinion of the higher court than that. After all, legal libraries are full of judicial opinions that affirm a woman’s right to abort pregnancy before viability, although the judges and judges who made these decisions were and are personally fiercely opposed to [women] have that right. The individual opinions of these judges and judges on the matter were and are irrelevant to their decisions. And this is how it should be. “