Oct 20, 2017
As reproductive rights advocates rallied outside the Department of Health and Human Services on Friday morning in support of an undocumented 17-year-old seeking an abortion, an ACLU attorney attended a federal court hearing on the teenager's behalf to challenge attempts by Trump administration officials to prevent her from terminating her pregnancy.
Outside HHS: "Not the church, not the state! Women must decide their fate!" #JusticeForJane @NARAL @peoplepower @NLIRH @PPFA @Rewire_News pic.twitter.com/ayIPjoXgQa
-- Lauryn Gutierrez (@GutzyLo) October 20, 2017
The ACLU has filed a lawsuit on the grounds that a policy established by the Trump administration's Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) that effectively bars undocumented minors in federal custody from accessing abortion is unconstitutional.
Three weeks after the teenager from Central America, referred to only as Jane Doe, was initially scheduled to visit an abortion provider in Texas--after receiving a waiver from a state court, which is required because she is a minor--a D.C. District Court judge on Wednesday ruled that she must be allowed to have the procedure.
However, the federal government--which claims it is posing no undue burden on the teen by blocking her attempts to abort her pregnancy--immediately filed an appeal, prompting the D.C. Circuit Court to issue an administrative stay on Thursday. The decision temporarily delayed Jane Doe's abortion, which had been rescheduled for Friday, Oct. 20.
Instead, on Friday morning, the appeals court--reportedly for the first time--allowed audio of the hearing to be livestreamed online. As ACLU attorney Brigitte Amiri explained to the court why the government's actions have violated the teen's constitutional rights, the group summarized the arguments on Twitter.
\u201cThe government lawyer admits the reason Jane Doe can't have an abortion is that she is in HHS custody. \n\nAnd that adults in ICE custody, or in federal prison, would have access to abortion. #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508509383
\u201cThe government says that even if Jane Doe faces persecution in her home country, denying her abortion here would still not be an undue burden. #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508509776
\u201cOur lawyer Brigitte Amiri counters: \n"Your honor, since 1973 the Supreme Court has held that the government can't stand in the way of a woman who wants an abortion. The government is standing in the way." #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508510588
After the hearing, Amiri toldNBC's Charlie Gile: "It's blatantly unconstitutional what the government is doing to Jane Doe. They are holding her hostage and preventing her from having an abortion--and also, the harm to her is so great, and the harm to the government is nonexistent."
\u201cACLU attorney Brigitte Amiri representing Jane Doe in abortion case: The Trump administration is \u201cholding her hostage\u201d.\u201d— Charlie Gile (@Charlie Gile) 1508516658
Reporters and pro-choice advocates who listened in highlighted flaws in arguments made by the government attorney.
\u201cGov't: If undocumented teen wants an abortion, she can agree to go back to her home country.\nD.C. Cir.: Is abortion legal there?\nGov't: No.\u201d— Brad Heath (@Brad Heath) 1508509968
\u201cDoJ doesn't even know the difference between consensual and non-consensual sex.\u201d— Jessica Mason Pieklo (@Jessica Mason Pieklo) 1508508970
\u201cJudge Millett asks, "What's the gov interest in not facilitating ab for JD but facilitating for adults?" DOJ: "Promoting childbirth." \ud83d\ude31\u201d— Jane's Due Process (@Jane's Due Process) 1508508926
Advocates also pointed to the case as an example of the Trump administration's broader efforts to limit women's healthcare, particularly access to reproductive care.
"What this administration is doing to Jane is what they'd do to every woman in this country if they could," said writer and women's advocate Sarah Lipton-Lubet. "This is true 100%," Arimi responded, following the hearing.
\u201cWhat this administration is doing to Jane is what they'd do to every woman in this country if they could. #JusticeForJane https://t.co/nS4ASkNzcL\u201d— Sarah Lipton-Lubet (@Sarah Lipton-Lubet) 1508519396
\u201cThis is true 100% https://t.co/fxROq96LDy\u201d— Brigitte Amiri (@Brigitte Amiri) 1508522976
While Jane Doe remains approximately 15 weeks pregnant (Texas bans abortion after 20 weeks), the Circuit Court has yet to issue a final ruling on the case.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
As reproductive rights advocates rallied outside the Department of Health and Human Services on Friday morning in support of an undocumented 17-year-old seeking an abortion, an ACLU attorney attended a federal court hearing on the teenager's behalf to challenge attempts by Trump administration officials to prevent her from terminating her pregnancy.
Outside HHS: "Not the church, not the state! Women must decide their fate!" #JusticeForJane @NARAL @peoplepower @NLIRH @PPFA @Rewire_News pic.twitter.com/ayIPjoXgQa
-- Lauryn Gutierrez (@GutzyLo) October 20, 2017
The ACLU has filed a lawsuit on the grounds that a policy established by the Trump administration's Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) that effectively bars undocumented minors in federal custody from accessing abortion is unconstitutional.
Three weeks after the teenager from Central America, referred to only as Jane Doe, was initially scheduled to visit an abortion provider in Texas--after receiving a waiver from a state court, which is required because she is a minor--a D.C. District Court judge on Wednesday ruled that she must be allowed to have the procedure.
However, the federal government--which claims it is posing no undue burden on the teen by blocking her attempts to abort her pregnancy--immediately filed an appeal, prompting the D.C. Circuit Court to issue an administrative stay on Thursday. The decision temporarily delayed Jane Doe's abortion, which had been rescheduled for Friday, Oct. 20.
Instead, on Friday morning, the appeals court--reportedly for the first time--allowed audio of the hearing to be livestreamed online. As ACLU attorney Brigitte Amiri explained to the court why the government's actions have violated the teen's constitutional rights, the group summarized the arguments on Twitter.
\u201cThe government lawyer admits the reason Jane Doe can't have an abortion is that she is in HHS custody. \n\nAnd that adults in ICE custody, or in federal prison, would have access to abortion. #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508509383
\u201cThe government says that even if Jane Doe faces persecution in her home country, denying her abortion here would still not be an undue burden. #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508509776
\u201cOur lawyer Brigitte Amiri counters: \n"Your honor, since 1973 the Supreme Court has held that the government can't stand in the way of a woman who wants an abortion. The government is standing in the way." #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508510588
After the hearing, Amiri toldNBC's Charlie Gile: "It's blatantly unconstitutional what the government is doing to Jane Doe. They are holding her hostage and preventing her from having an abortion--and also, the harm to her is so great, and the harm to the government is nonexistent."
\u201cACLU attorney Brigitte Amiri representing Jane Doe in abortion case: The Trump administration is \u201cholding her hostage\u201d.\u201d— Charlie Gile (@Charlie Gile) 1508516658
Reporters and pro-choice advocates who listened in highlighted flaws in arguments made by the government attorney.
\u201cGov't: If undocumented teen wants an abortion, she can agree to go back to her home country.\nD.C. Cir.: Is abortion legal there?\nGov't: No.\u201d— Brad Heath (@Brad Heath) 1508509968
\u201cDoJ doesn't even know the difference between consensual and non-consensual sex.\u201d— Jessica Mason Pieklo (@Jessica Mason Pieklo) 1508508970
\u201cJudge Millett asks, "What's the gov interest in not facilitating ab for JD but facilitating for adults?" DOJ: "Promoting childbirth." \ud83d\ude31\u201d— Jane's Due Process (@Jane's Due Process) 1508508926
Advocates also pointed to the case as an example of the Trump administration's broader efforts to limit women's healthcare, particularly access to reproductive care.
"What this administration is doing to Jane is what they'd do to every woman in this country if they could," said writer and women's advocate Sarah Lipton-Lubet. "This is true 100%," Arimi responded, following the hearing.
\u201cWhat this administration is doing to Jane is what they'd do to every woman in this country if they could. #JusticeForJane https://t.co/nS4ASkNzcL\u201d— Sarah Lipton-Lubet (@Sarah Lipton-Lubet) 1508519396
\u201cThis is true 100% https://t.co/fxROq96LDy\u201d— Brigitte Amiri (@Brigitte Amiri) 1508522976
While Jane Doe remains approximately 15 weeks pregnant (Texas bans abortion after 20 weeks), the Circuit Court has yet to issue a final ruling on the case.
As reproductive rights advocates rallied outside the Department of Health and Human Services on Friday morning in support of an undocumented 17-year-old seeking an abortion, an ACLU attorney attended a federal court hearing on the teenager's behalf to challenge attempts by Trump administration officials to prevent her from terminating her pregnancy.
Outside HHS: "Not the church, not the state! Women must decide their fate!" #JusticeForJane @NARAL @peoplepower @NLIRH @PPFA @Rewire_News pic.twitter.com/ayIPjoXgQa
-- Lauryn Gutierrez (@GutzyLo) October 20, 2017
The ACLU has filed a lawsuit on the grounds that a policy established by the Trump administration's Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) that effectively bars undocumented minors in federal custody from accessing abortion is unconstitutional.
Three weeks after the teenager from Central America, referred to only as Jane Doe, was initially scheduled to visit an abortion provider in Texas--after receiving a waiver from a state court, which is required because she is a minor--a D.C. District Court judge on Wednesday ruled that she must be allowed to have the procedure.
However, the federal government--which claims it is posing no undue burden on the teen by blocking her attempts to abort her pregnancy--immediately filed an appeal, prompting the D.C. Circuit Court to issue an administrative stay on Thursday. The decision temporarily delayed Jane Doe's abortion, which had been rescheduled for Friday, Oct. 20.
Instead, on Friday morning, the appeals court--reportedly for the first time--allowed audio of the hearing to be livestreamed online. As ACLU attorney Brigitte Amiri explained to the court why the government's actions have violated the teen's constitutional rights, the group summarized the arguments on Twitter.
\u201cThe government lawyer admits the reason Jane Doe can't have an abortion is that she is in HHS custody. \n\nAnd that adults in ICE custody, or in federal prison, would have access to abortion. #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508509383
\u201cThe government says that even if Jane Doe faces persecution in her home country, denying her abortion here would still not be an undue burden. #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508509776
\u201cOur lawyer Brigitte Amiri counters: \n"Your honor, since 1973 the Supreme Court has held that the government can't stand in the way of a woman who wants an abortion. The government is standing in the way." #JusticeforJane\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1508510588
After the hearing, Amiri toldNBC's Charlie Gile: "It's blatantly unconstitutional what the government is doing to Jane Doe. They are holding her hostage and preventing her from having an abortion--and also, the harm to her is so great, and the harm to the government is nonexistent."
\u201cACLU attorney Brigitte Amiri representing Jane Doe in abortion case: The Trump administration is \u201cholding her hostage\u201d.\u201d— Charlie Gile (@Charlie Gile) 1508516658
Reporters and pro-choice advocates who listened in highlighted flaws in arguments made by the government attorney.
\u201cGov't: If undocumented teen wants an abortion, she can agree to go back to her home country.\nD.C. Cir.: Is abortion legal there?\nGov't: No.\u201d— Brad Heath (@Brad Heath) 1508509968
\u201cDoJ doesn't even know the difference between consensual and non-consensual sex.\u201d— Jessica Mason Pieklo (@Jessica Mason Pieklo) 1508508970
\u201cJudge Millett asks, "What's the gov interest in not facilitating ab for JD but facilitating for adults?" DOJ: "Promoting childbirth." \ud83d\ude31\u201d— Jane's Due Process (@Jane's Due Process) 1508508926
Advocates also pointed to the case as an example of the Trump administration's broader efforts to limit women's healthcare, particularly access to reproductive care.
"What this administration is doing to Jane is what they'd do to every woman in this country if they could," said writer and women's advocate Sarah Lipton-Lubet. "This is true 100%," Arimi responded, following the hearing.
\u201cWhat this administration is doing to Jane is what they'd do to every woman in this country if they could. #JusticeForJane https://t.co/nS4ASkNzcL\u201d— Sarah Lipton-Lubet (@Sarah Lipton-Lubet) 1508519396
\u201cThis is true 100% https://t.co/fxROq96LDy\u201d— Brigitte Amiri (@Brigitte Amiri) 1508522976
While Jane Doe remains approximately 15 weeks pregnant (Texas bans abortion after 20 weeks), the Circuit Court has yet to issue a final ruling on the case.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.