For Immediate Release
North Carolina’s Coercive Ultrasound Law Permanently Blocked as Supreme Court Refuses Review
Federal district court, appellate court both determined law violates First Amendment, interferes in doctor-patient relationship
WASHINGTON - The United States Supreme Court today declined to review a North Carolina law that would have forced a woman to undergo a narrated ultrasound before receiving an abortion—a measure that was blocked by both a district court and federal appeals court as unconstitutional.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found the law unconstitutional in December 2014, affirming that the law violates the First Amendment rights of physicians by forcing them to deliver politically motivated communications to a patient even over the patient’s objection. The unanimous decision by a three-judge panel ruled that “transforming the physician into the mouthpiece of the state undermines the trust that is necessary for facilitating healthy doctor-patient relationships and, through them, successful treatment outcomes.”
The law was preliminarily blocked in October 2011 following a lawsuit filed on behalf of several North Carolina physicians and medical practices by the Center for Reproductive Rights, American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation, Planned Parenthood, and the firm of O’Melveny & Myers. The measure was later permanently struck down as unconstitutional by a federal district court in January 2014. North Carolina asked the Supreme Court to review the measure in March 2015 after the Fourth Circuit found the law unconstitutional in December 2014.
We Interrupt This Article with an Urgent Message!
Common Dreams is a not-for-profit news service. All of our content is free to you - no subscriptions; no ads. We are funded by donations from our readers. This media model only works if enough readers pitch in. We have millions of readers every month and, it seems, too many take our survival for granted. It isn't. Our critical Mid-Year fundraiser is going very slow - only 561 readers have contributed a total of $21,000 so far. We must raise $29,000 more before we can end this fundraising campaign and get back to focusing on what we do best.
“The Supreme Court has left standing major victories in the lower courts that will keep politicians out of the exam room and the personal decisions of North Carolina women seeking to safely and legally end a pregnancy,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Women are fully capable of making thoughtful decisions about their families, future, and health without interference from politicians who presume to know better. And all doctors must be free to give patients their best medical judgment, free from talking points dictated by lawmakers advancing an agenda.”
“We are pleased that the Supreme Court decided not to review the decision striking down this law. Doctors shouldn’t be forced to humiliate a woman and disregard their best medical judgment in order to provide an abortion,” said Jennifer Dalven, director of the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “The purpose of this law was crystal clear: to shame a woman who has decided to have an abortion out of getting one. In this country, its not ok to turn doctors into the mouthpieces of politicians in order to make a woman feel bad about her decision.”
“This dangerous and misguided law should never have passed in the first place. Politicians across the country should take note — these harmful and unconstitutional restrictions won’t be tolerated by the courts or the public,” said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “This misguided law would have inserted politics and bad medicine into every exam room in North Carolina. We are pleased that the courts are recognizing that these unconstitutional laws hurt women and block access to safe medical care.”
The North Carolina coercive ultrasound law, passed in 2011 by the General Assembly over the veto of then-Governor Bev Perdue, is one of the most extreme ultrasound laws in the country.
While the law would have allowed the woman to “avert her eyes” from the ultrasound screen and to “refuse to hear” the explanation of the images, the provider would still be required to place the images in front of her and describe them in detail over her objection. The North Carolina law applies even if a woman does not want to see the ultrasound, and makes no exception for rape, incest, serious health risks or severe fetal anomalies.
This law is one of hundreds of abortion restrictions that have been introduced by state legislatures with the goal of restricting access to abortion. In the past four years, state lawmakers enacted more than 230 abortion restrictions, and in the first quarter of 2015 alone, more than 330 abortion restrictions were introduced.
The Center for Reproductive Rights uses the law to advance reproductive freedom as a fundamental human right that all governments are legally obligated to protect, respect, and fulfill.