New Hampshire Case to be Heard by U.S. Supreme Court
Sunday, May 22, 2005
By: Dawn Touzin

PPNNE Press Release -- Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood Underscores Importance of Judicial Nominees

Concord, NH -- Women’s health advocates in the state were surprised at today’s announcement of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to hear a case that challenges access to safe abortion and rolls back protections for women’s health. 

“The law was ruled unconstitutional late last year by the First Circuit Court of Appeals because it contained no health exception in the event of a medical emergency,” said Dawn Touzin, Public Affairs Director for Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, one of four plaintiffs in the New Hampshire case. “The U.S. Supreme Court has previously ruled that no state may enact an abortion restriction unless there are clear exceptions to protect women’s health. So, while we are disappointed that the court has agreed to hear this case, we are confident that this court will reaffirm a woman’s right to safe abortion access."

“The Supreme Court’s decision to hear this case shines additional light on the debate over judicial nominees currently unfolding in the Senate,” adds Touzin.  “Because it could be up to a full year before the case is heard and a ruling is announced, which nine justices are sitting on the high court when this case is decided is crucial. Upcoming federal court and Supreme Court appointments are absolutely critical to protecting women’s full constitutional rights to medical privacy.”

The law in question would have required health care providers to notify a parent at least 48 hours before providing an abortion to a woman under the age of 18, or for young women to obtain a court waiver of this requirement. The law contained no exception for circumstances in which the delay would seriously threaten a young woman's health. Instead the law would have forced physicians to wait to provide emergency medical care until the young woman was facing imminent death. It was struck down by the Boston-based 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled the 2003 law unconstitutional for failing to provide an exception to protect the minor's health in the event of a medical emergency.

“We are women’s health specialists, and the safety of our patients is our number one concern.  While every parent hopes to have the relationship with their teen that would ensure open communication in the event of an unintended pregnancy, we believe every parent  most wants their adolescent’s health and future fertility protected.  And indeed, if the standard of proof in deciding about abortion restrictions is changed- -this case will not only affect adolescents, it will affect us all.”

“We will never reduce the need for abortion by placing roadblocks in front of women or by imposing family communication,” continues Touzin. “The state of New Hampshire should not be allowed to legislate away the health and safety of its citizens. Unintended pregnancies are prevented with equal access to quality reproductive health care and full and factual sexual health education.  It’s what we do every day in our 26 health centers where we serve 59,000 women, men, and teens annually-and it is a commitment we will keep."
                                                                   

 ###