Idaho Abortion Lawsuit: Jennie Linn McCormack Challenges State Fetal Pain Law
By REBECCA BOONE 08/31/11 08:41 PM ET AP
BOISE, Idaho -- An eastern Idaho woman has filed what is believed to be the first lawsuit in the nation to directly challenge the constitutionality of a so-called "fetal pain" abortion ban.
Jennie Linn McCormack filed suit in federal court against Bannock County's prosecuting attorney, contending Idaho's new law banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy violates the Constitution.
Idaho is one of six states that have enacted such bans in the past two years. The bans are based on the premise that a fetus may feel pain at 20 weeks.
McCormack, who was briefly charged with having an illegal abortion, is seeking class-action status in her lawsuit against prosecutor Mark Hiedeman. The suit also challenges other parts of Idaho abortion law.
McCormack was charged with a felony in June after police said she took pills to terminate her pregnancy last December. Police found the fetus in a box at McCormack's Pocatello home Jan. 9, and an autopsy determined it was between five and six months gestation. Police said McCormack told them she didn't have enough money to go to a licensed medical professional, so her sister helped her access abortion-inducing drugs online.
A judge later dismissed the criminal case without prejudice for lack of evidence. That means the prosecutor may refile charges if he chooses, unless the federal courts stop him from doing so.
In the lawsuit, McCormack challenges the lack of access to abortions for women in her region, as well as the ban on abortions after 20 weeks.
She notes there are no elective-abortion providers in southeastern Idaho, forcing women seeking the procedure to travel elsewhere.
McCormack was unmarried and unemployed at the time of her pregnancy – with an income of $200 to $250 a month – and already had three children. She couldn't afford the time or money it would take to travel to Salt Lake City to get an abortion, the lawsuit says.
If McCormack prevails, it will be a win for women across the region, said her attorney, Richard Hearn of Pocatello.
"If we're successful, they'll be able to access legal and safe abortions in southeastern Idaho," whether performed with medicine or surgically in a clinic, Hearn said Wednesday.
Hiedeman could not be immediately reached for comment.
Idaho law bars women from getting abortions from anyone but licensed Idaho physicians, and requires that second-trimester abortions be performed in a hospital. Women who purposely cause their own abortions, or who get abortions from unlicensed physicians, face up to five years in prison and up to a $5,000 fine.
McCormack is asking a judge to find that those criminal sanctions are unconstitutional, in part because they wrongly burden women in regions like southeastern Idaho that lack abortion providers...............................>>>>................................>>>>..............................http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/31/idaho-abortion-lawsuit_n_944351.html
McCormack was unmarried and unemployed at the time of her pregnancy – with an income of $200 to $250 a month – and already had three children. She couldn't afford the time or money it would take to travel to Salt Lake City to get an abortion, the lawsuit says.
So she is unemployed($200/$250 month income), not married, three kids and doesn't have time to travel to kill the FOURTH kid???? Guess she should have thought of that before that steamy night of sex, huh? PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY folks!!! OMG!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
So she is unemployed($200/$250 month income), not married, three kids and doesn't have time to travel to kill the FOURTH kid???? Guess she should have thought of that before that steamy night of sex, huh? PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY folks!!! OMG!!!
Personal Responsibility is not bringing ANOTHER unwanted child into the world... So that Bumble can complain she's a welfare mom.
Either way... She will be labeled a Welfare mom, or Killing her "child".
The real aim of this whole line of thought is to keep women from having sex... If it were to prevent unwanted babies, the Right would be funding PP to promote Birth Control.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Personal Responsibility is not bringing aborting ANOTHER unwanted child into the world... So that Bumble can complain she's a welfare mom.
Either way... She will be labeled a Welfare mom, or Killing her "child".
The real aim of this whole line of thought is to keep women from having sex... If it were to prevent unwanted babies, the Right would be funding PP to promote Birth Control.
I love what the "real aim" is...Makes me question how many women box has been with that had to get abortions. Since box thinks it is IMPOSSIBLE to have sex without conceiving or conceiving by choice.
birth control chemicals ARE NOT without longterm effects.....
where is the 'sperm control chemical'....and dont say not having sex....honestly really? I mean an ingested chemical that prevents sperm from 'mating'.....is it really only a raincoat or cold shower that prevents this? I doubt it......
but,,,yes the woman should have thought about her problems and longterm plans before the hump games.....although women for thousands of years were performing their own abortions with ingested chemicals(albeit natural plant stuff) to aleviate the 'burden'...even to the relief of their significant others who were the providers of food/shelter etc......
it will never go away.....but,,,isn't there a remedy for stupid, I think she forgot to take that medicine....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Personal Responsibility is not bringing ANOTHER unwanted child into the world... So that Bumble can complain she's a welfare mom.
Either way... She will be labeled a Welfare mom, or Killing her "child".
The real aim of this whole line of thought is to keep women from having sex... If it were to prevent unwanted babies, the Right would be funding PP to promote Birth Control.
"Personal responsibility" is preventing the conception of an unwanted child...this woman should have had her sister help her find birth control before conceiving....rather than their idea of post conception birth control...which was, in fact, "killing her child".
Logged
