December, 15 2014, 01:45pm EDT
Supreme Court Denies Review of Arizona Abortion Restrictions, Politically Motivated Law Remains Blocked by Court Order
The United States Supreme Court today declined to review an Arizona law that would severely limit women's access to medication abortion, an extremely safe method of ending a pregnancy in its earliest stages. The measure will remain preliminarily blocked by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit while the case proceeds in federal district court.
NEW YORK, NY
The United States Supreme Court today declined to review an Arizona law that would severely limit women's access to medication abortion, an extremely safe method of ending a pregnancy in its earliest stages. The measure will remain preliminarily blocked by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit while the case proceeds in federal district court.
"By allowing to stand the Ninth Circuit's strong decision blocking this underhanded law, the U.S. Supreme Court has ensured Arizona women will continue to have the same critical and constitutionally protected health care tomorrow that they have today," said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. "Women who have made the decision to end a pregnancy will continue to get safe, legal care based on the expertise of their doctors, not politicians who presume to know better."
"The Court did the right thing today, but 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. "Politicians are not medical experts -- but politicians have written this law with the ultimate goal of making safe, legal abortion hard or even impossible to access. We are pleased that the courts are recognizing that these unconstitutional laws hurt women and block access to safe medical care."
Background:
Women in the United States have been safely and legally using medication abortion for over a decade, with approximately one in four women who make the decision to end a pregnancy choosing this method if it's an option--in Arizona, the number is closer to half. Data, including from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), shows that abortion has over a 99 percent safety record, with women experiencing complications less than 1 percent of the time. Further, medical studies have shown that medication abortion is just as safe as surgical abortion.
Arizona's regulation -- which was issued by the Department of Health Services in January 2014 under the authority of a law signed by Governor Jan Brewer in April 2012 -- either bans medication abortion entirely or the practical impact would make the method unavailable because it mandates an outdated and inferior protocol that has been called "bad medicine," by experts like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).
The law would deprive many women of access to abortion altogether, particularly in northern Arizona where Planned Parenthood Arizona is the sole provider of safe and legal abortion and would not be able to continue to offer that service under the burdensome requirements of this law. Women in this part of the state would be left having to travel an average of 321 miles roundtrip -- twice -- to get an abortion in Arizona.
ACOG and the American Medical Association submitted a joint amicus curiae brief in April 2014 in support of the legal challenge, explaining that the Arizona law "jeopardizes women's health by requiring that physicians deny women the benefit of the most current, well-researched, safe, evidence-based, and proven protocols for the provision of medical abortion and, instead, prescribe a regimen that is outdated and less safe."
The Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, filed the lawsuit in Arizona federal district court in March 2014 on behalf of Planned Parenthood Arizona and the Tucson Women's Center challenging Arizona's restrictions on medication abortion. On March 31, a federal trial court failed to protect Arizona women's constitutional rights to non-surgical abortion and women's health care providers and advocates immediately asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to reverse that decision, which the court granted on an emergency basis a few days later. In June 2014, the Ninth Circuit preliminarily blocked the law, stating "the Arizona law imposes an undue--and therefore unconstitutional--burden on women's access to abortion." In evaluating the state's attempts to justify the restrictions, the decision also stated that "the 'medical grounds thus far presented' are not merely 'feeble.' They are non-existent."
Harmful and unconstitutional restrictions like these further underscore the need for the federal Women's Health Protection Act (S. 1696/H.R. 3471) -- a bill that would prohibit states like Arizona from imposing unconstitutional restrictions on reproductive health care providers that apply to no similar medical care, interfere with women's personal decision making, and block access to safe and legal abortion services.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. CCR is committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
(212) 614-6464LATEST NEWS
'A Critical Situation': Gaza Doctor Warns of Catastrophe as Israel Assails Hospital
"We have called on the world to protect both the healthcare system and its workers, yet we have not received any response from anyone globally," said the director of Kamal Adwan Hospital.
Dec 08, 2024
The director of one of the few partially functioning hospitals in northern Gaza said Sunday that Israeli attacks have put the facility's remaining patients—including more than a dozen children—in grave danger and pleaded with the international community to intervene.
"Following the recent attack on Kamal Adwan Hospital, which involved over 100 shells and bombs indiscriminately targeting the facility, the damage has been severe," Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, the hospital's director, said in a statement. "As of now, one of the hospital buildings remains without electricity, oxygen, or water. The shelling continues to occur randomly in the vicinity, preventing us from conducting repairs on the oxygen, electricity, and water networks."
Abu Safiya said the overwhelmed and under-resourced hospital is currently treating 112 wounded patients, including six people in intensive care and 14 children.
"This is a critical situation," he said Sunday morning. "The bombardment and gunfire have not ceased; planes are dropping bombs around the clock. We are uncertain of what lies ahead and what the army wants from the hospital."
"We have called on the world to protect both the healthcare system and its workers, yet we have not received any response from anyone globally," Abu Safiya added. "This represents a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding against the healthcare workers and patients. Unfortunately, there seems to be no effort to halt this relentless assault on Kamal Adwan Hospital and the broader health system."
The hospital director's statement came after Israeli attacks near the facility killed scores of people on Friday. Photos taken from the scene showed bodies on the ground amid building ruins.
(Photo: AFP via Getty Images)
A day earlier, an Israeli airstrike on the Kamal Adwan Hospital compound killed a 16-year-old boy in a wheelchair and wounded a dozen others, The Associated Pressreported.
According toDrop Site, the boy "was struck as he entered the X-ray department."
Northern Gaza has been under intense Israeli assault for two months, and the humanitarian situation there and across the Palestinian enclave is worse than ever, according to U.N. agencies and aid organizations.
"The catastrophe in Gaza is nothing short of a complete breakdown of our common humanity," said U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres. "The nightmare must stop. We cannot continue to look away."
Abu Safiya said Sunday that his hospital is facing outages of electricity and water amid Israel's incessant attacks.
"We urgently appeal to the international community for assistance," he said. "The situation is extremely dangerous."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Assad Government Falls After Nearly 14 Years of Civil War as Rebels Seize Capital
"The city of Damascus has been liberated," rebel fighters declared on state TV.
Dec 08, 2024
The government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad collapsed Sunday after rebels seized control of the capital following a stunning advance through major cities, prompting celebrations in the streets as the country's ousted leader reportedly fled.
"The city of Damascus has been liberated," rebel fighters declared on state TV. "The regime of the tyrant Bashar al-Assad has been toppled."
Video footage posted to social media showed rebels escorting Syrian Prime Minister Mohammad Ghazi al-Jalali to meet with their leaders. The prime minister said that "we are ready to cooperate" and called for free elections and the preservation of "all the properties of the people and the institutions of the Syrian state."
"They belong to all Syrians," he said.
A video captured outside the Syrian Prime Minister's residence shows rebel forces escorting Mohamad Al Jalali to a meeting with their leaders at the Four Seasons Hotel pic.twitter.com/WkT2IZAJLi
— The National (@TheNationalNews) December 8, 2024
The rebel movement was led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)—an Islamist organization that was once an affiliate of al-Qaeda—along with Turkish-backed Syrian militias. HTS is led by Abu Mohammad al-Jolani; the U.S. State Department has deemed him a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" and is offering a reward of up to $10 million for information that results in his capture.
After the Assad government fell, ending a decades-long family dynasty, The Associated Pressreported that "revelers filled Umayyad Square in the city center, where the Defense Ministry is located."
"Men fired celebratory gunshots into the air and some waved the three-starred Syrian flag that predates the Assad government and was adopted by the revolutionaries," the outlet reported. "A few kilometers (miles) away, Syrians stormed the presidential palace, tearing up portraits of the toppled president. Soldiers and police officers left their posts and fled, and looters broke into the Defense Ministry. Videos from Damascus showed families wandering into the presidential palace, with some emerging carrying stacks of plates and other household items."
Prisons, including a notorious facility on the outskirts of Damascus that Amnesty International described as a "human slaughterhouse," were reportedly opened in the wake of Assad's ouster, with video footage showing detainees walking free.
"Literally seeing hundreds of people across Damascus, friends, family people I've known to be neutral and not involved in politics, all post green flags, all support this movement, people are tired, broken and angry, they want change and change is what they've got," Danny Makki, a non-resident scholar at the Middle East Institute who was on the ground in Damascus as the government fell, wrote on social media.
(Photo: Aref Tammawi/AFP via Getty Images)
Assad's whereabouts are not known; he left the country without issuing a statement. Reutersreported that the ousted president, "who has not spoken in public since the sudden rebel advance a week ago, flew out of Damascus for an unknown destination earlier on Sunday."
Russia's Foreign Ministry said in a statement that "as a result of negotiations between B. Assad and a number of participants in the armed conflict on the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic, he decided to resign from the presidency and left the country, giving instructions for a peaceful transfer of power."
The explosion of Syria's civil war in recent days brought renewed focus to the current role of United States troops in the country. There are currently around 900 American forces in Syria alongside an unknown number of private contractors—troop presence that the Pentagon said it intends to maintain in the wake of Assad's ouster.
The U.S. has said it was not involved in the rebel offensive. In a social media post, a spokesperson for the White House National Security Council wrote that President Joe Biden and his team "are closely monitoring the extraordinary events in Syria and staying in constant touch with regional partners."
The U.S.-backed Israeli military said Sunday that it has "taken up new positions in a buffer zone between Israel and Syria" in the occupied Golan Heights "as it prepared for potential chaos following the lightning-fast fall" of Assad, The Times of Israelreported.
"Syrian media reports said Israel had launched artillery shelling in the area," the outlet added.
Geir Pedersen, the United Nations' special envoy for Syria, said in a statement Sunday that Assad's fall "marks a watershed moment in Syria's history—a nation that has endured nearly 14 years of relentless suffering and unspeakable loss."
"The challenges ahead remain immense and we hear those who are anxious and apprehensive," said Pedersen. "Yet this is a moment to embrace the possibility of renewal. The resilience of the Syrian people offers a path toward a united and peaceful Syria."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Roughly 900 US Troops Still in Syria as Rebels Close in on Damascus
"Whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not," U.S. troops "are likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now," warned one analyst.
Dec 07, 2024
Syrian rebel groups' rapid advance on the nation's capital city of Damascus and the possible collapse of President Bashar al-Assad's government after more than a decade of civil war has brought renewed attention to the continued presence of U.S. forces in the country, despite the absence of a clear legal authorization.
The U.S. is believed to have around 900 troops deployed to Syria, mostly in the northeast, as well as an unknown number of private contractors. Nick Turse, a contributing writer for The Intercept, observed Thursday that American forces in Syria "have, on average, come under fire multiple times each week since last October," according to internal Pentagon statistics.
"Keeping military personnel in harm's way for the sake of foreign policy credibility has become increasingly risky with the Gaza war and the flare-up of the Syrian civil war," Turse wrote.
Kelley Vlahos, senior adviser to the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote Saturday morning that "whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not," U.S. troops "are likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now."
Reutersreported Tuesday that as rebels advanced toward the city of Hama, "fighters from a U.S.-backed, Kurdish-led coalition battled government forces in the northeast, both sides said, opening a new front along a vital supply route" and "compounding Assad's problems."
As the coalition of groups led by the Islamist organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and factions of the Turkey-backed Syrian National Army has quickly seized control of large swaths of territory, the White House National Security Council (NSC) said in a statement last weekend that the U.S.—which has previously armed and trained Syrian rebels—"has nothing to do with this offensive."
"The United States, together with its partners and allies, urge de-escalation, protection of civilians and minority groups, and a serious and credible political process that can end this civil war once and for all with a political settlement consistent with UNSCR 2254," said NSC spokesperson Sean Savett. "We will also continue to fully defend and protect U.S. personnel and U.S. military positions, which remain essential to ensuring that ISIS can never again resurge in Syria."
On Friday, the White House said in a letter to Congress that "a small presence of United States Armed Forces remains in strategically significant locations in Syria to conduct operations, in partnership with local, vetted ground forces, to address continuing terrorist threats emanating from Syria."
President-elect Donald Trump, who during his first term opted to keep U.S. troops in Syria for the openly stated purpose of exploiting the country's oil fields, wrote in a social media post on Saturday that "the United States should have nothing to do with" the current conflict.
"This is not our fight," he wrote in all caps. "Let it play out. Do not get involved!"
Trump's post, as The Associated Pressreported, came as rebels' "stunning march across Syria gained speed... with news that they had reached the suburbs of the capital and with the government forced to deny rumors that President Bashar al-Assad had fled the country."
Hassan Abdul-Ghani, an insurgent commander, said in a Telegram post that rebels are entering the "final stage" of their offensive as they began to encircle Syria's capital. Citing unnamed local sources, Al Jazeerareported that "a state of panic has spread as army troops withdraw from their positions around Damascus."
"They also confirmed that opposition forces had advanced in the western Damascus countryside and the withdrawal of army forces from cities and towns in Eastern Ghouta," the outlet added. "There was a rush for food items in markets in the capital."
Government forces have been backed by Russian airstrikes, Hezbollah, and Iraqi militia fighters.
Reutersreported that "Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in an Arabic-language interview that Tehran would consider sending troops to Syria if Damascus asked, and Russian President Vladimir Putin urged an end to 'terrorist aggression' in Syria."
In a video statement on Saturday, a Syrian military commander said that "our valiant army continues to carry out its operations against terrorist gatherings at high rates in the directions of the Hama and Homs countrysides and the northern Daraa countryside, inflicting hundreds of deaths and injuries on the terrorists."
Anti-war lawmakers in the U.S. have repeatedly questioned the role of American troops in Syria in recent years and launched efforts to force their withdrawal.
In March 2023, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. House put forth a resolution that would have required full withdrawal of American forces from Syria within 180 days of passage in the absence of congressional action authorizing their continued presence.
The resolution was voted down by 170 Republicans and 150 Democrats.
Months later, the U.S. Senate tanked a similar effort.
Erik Sperling, executive director of the advocacy group Just Foreign Policy, told The Intercept on Thursday that the Biden administration hasn't "put the war in Syria up for debate because they know the American people don't want another war in the Middle East."
"They know there is no popular support for putting U.S. troops at risk for this," said Sperling, who warned that "many of Trump's advisers will try to drag him deeper into this regional conflict in the Middle East."
The explosion of Syria's civil war in recent days has been disastrous for civilians in the crossfire.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Wednesday that "the outbreak of major hostilities... raises concerns that civilians face a real risk of serious abuses at the hands of opposition armed groups and the Syrian government."
"The bloody record of atrocities by all parties to the conflict in Syria is bound to persist until leaders go beyond words and support accountability efforts," said Adam Coogle, HRW's deputy Middle East director. "Without credible justice, there will be no end in sight to the suffering Syrians have endured, no matter who controls the land."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular