Federal court throws out state challenge to abortion-refusal law

Article

A federal judge tossed out California’s constitutional challenge to a US statute that strengthens physicians’ right to refuse to perform abortions because of their personal beliefs, according to American Medical News (4/14/08). The Weldon Amendment extends “conscience” protection to hospitals and health plans by prohibiting federal, state, and local agencies from taking action against doctors or institutions that opt not to offer abortions. Government bodies that violate the measure risk losing federal funding.

A federal judge tossed out California’s constitutional challenge to a US statute that strengthens physicians’ right to refuse to perform abortions because of their personal beliefs, according to American Medical News (4/14/08). The Weldon Amendment extends “conscience” protection to hospitals and health plans by prohibiting federal, state, and local agencies from taking action against doctors or institutions that opt not to offer abortions. Government bodies that violate the measure risk losing federal funding.

California, along with 45 other states, also has its own “conscience” protection, giving doctors the right to decline to provide abortions for moral, ethical, or religious reasons. But California also has another state law that requires health care entities to provide or refer emergency abortions when the life or health of the pregnant woman is at risk. If enforced, this state law could cause California to lose as much as $50 billion in federal funds under the Weldon Amendment. State officials argued that the amendment was unconstitutional because it lacked an explicit exception for such scenarios and interfered with California’s right to carry out its statute.

US District Judge Jeffrey S. White rejected those claims, saying that the state did not show that patients or the state have been harmed by the seeming conflict. The judge indicated that only if a woman is denied emergency abortion-related services and California enforces its law and the federal government denies or threatens to take away funding, “the case then would be ripe for a court to consider this matter.”

Related Videos
Understanding combined oral contraceptives and breast cancer risk | Image Credit: health.ucdavis.edu
Why doxycycline PEP lacks clinical data for STI prevention in women
The importance of nipocalimab’s FTD against FNAIT | Image Credit:  linkedin.com
Enhancing cervical cancer management with dual stain | Image Credit: linkedin.com
Fertility treatment challenges for Muslim women during fasting holidays | Image Credit: rmanetwork.com
Understanding the impact of STIs on young adults | Image Credit: providers.ucsd.edu.
CDC estimates of maternal mortality found overestimated | Image Credit: rwjms.rutgers.edu.
Study unveils maternal mortality tracking trends | Image Credit: obhg.com
How Harmonia Healthcare is revolutionizing hyperemesis gravidarum care | Image Credit: hyperemesis.org
Unveiling gender disparities in medicine | Image Credit:  findcare.ahn.org.
Related Content
© 2024 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.