March, 23 2022, 02:06pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
ACLU: aeverett@aclu.org ACLU of Florida: media@aclufl.org
Center for Reproductive Rights: center.press@reprorights.org
Florida State Court Indicates It Will Uphold Abortion Restriction That Forces Patients to Delay Care
WASHINGTON
A Florida state trial court indicated today that it will dismiss a challenge to an abortion restriction that will force patients to delay obtaining this time-sensitive care for at least 24 hours after meeting with a physician. The mandatory delay requirement forces patients to make an additional trip to a clinic to receive care. Since its enactment in 2015, the medically unnecessary restriction has largely been blocked, first by a trial court ruling granting a temporary injunction on the law shortly after enactment and then by a 2017 state supreme court ruling reinstating that injunction after an appellate court briefly allowed it to take effect.
Since the passage of this law, Florida politicians have continued to place hurdles in the path of people seeking abortion care as part of a larger effort to push care out of reach. The state legislature took its most extreme step yet in attacking reproductive freedom earlier this month when politicians passed a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to sign any day.
Florida's mandatory delay law singles out abortion and does not apply to other medical procedures, even those that involve far greater health risks. Florida's law requires patients to make an additional trip to a clinic, which will force many people to miss work, lose wages, and spend more on transportation and child care. Those without the means to do so could be prevented from getting care entirely. Delaying access to abortion is medically unnecessary and is another tactic designed to take away people's ability to get care when they've decided to have an abortion. Laws that require people to delay care push people to have abortions in later pregnancy, which increases both the cost and the risks of the procedure. In fact, when a similar 24-hour delay law took effect in Mississippi, abortions later in pregnancy increased by 53 percent.
The case, Gainesville Woman Care v. Florida, was brought on behalf of Gainesville Woman Care LLC and Medical Students for Choice by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Florida, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, and Tallahassee attorney Richard Johnson.
In response to the court's decision, the ACLU, ACLU of Florida, and Center for Reproductive Rights released the following statements:
Julia Kaye, staff attorney, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project:
"This law is an insult to Floridians and their ability to make their own medical decisions. When someone has determined that having an abortion is the best decision for them and their family, politicians should not be in the business of putting unnecessary obstacles in their path, but that is exactly what this law does. And this harmful restriction is just one in a string of laws that Florida politicians have passed to turn back the clock and take away people's rights to make their own decisions about pregnancy and about the course of their lives. We will continue fighting laws designed to push abortion out of reach in Florida and across this country until every person can get the care they need, regardless of their zip code."
Daniel Tilley, legal director, ACLU of Florida:
"This law imposes a significant hardship on Floridians that is medically unnecessary, arbitrary, and dangerous. For years, the Courts have agreed that imposing an additional barrier that would delay an individual's ability to receive the abortion care they need was in direct violation of Floridians' right to privacy. A person's private medical decisions should be made in consultation with a doctor they trust, not politicians, and no one should ever be made to delay the care they need. Abortion care should be safe and accessible. Politicians have no right to interfere with Floridians' private medical decisions."
Marc Hearron, Senior Counsel, Center for Reproductive Rights:
"This demeaning, intrusive law forcibly delays a person's access to essential healthcare despite potentially dangerous risks to their health. Politicians should not be dictating a person's own medical decision of whether and when to end a pregnancy. Abortion access in Florida is in real peril, and this restriction is just another way to push abortion care out of reach and infringe on the rights of Floridians. We will continue to fight to ensure that Floridians can get the care they need without political interference."
More about this case can be found: https://www.aclu.org/cases/gainesville-woman-care-llc-v-state-florida
This release can be found online here: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/florida-state-court-indicates-it-will-uphold-abortion-restriction-forces-patients
The mission of the ACLU of Florida is to protect, defend, strengthen, and promote the constitutional rights and liberties of all people in Florida. We envision a fair and just Florida, where all people are free, equal under the law, and live with dignity.
LATEST NEWS
Doing For-Profit Tax Industry's Bidding, GOP Calls On Trump to Cancel Direct File Program
"This is the most efficient way and cost-efficient way for millions of people to pay their taxes," said one advocate.
Dec 11, 2024
Responding to the "absurd" news that more than two dozen U.S. House Republicans are calling on President-elect Donald Trump to end the Internal Revenue Service's Direct File program, Rep. Gerry Connolly came to one conclusion: "Republicans want to make your lives more difficult."
The Virginia Democrat wasn't alone in denouncing a letter penned by Reps. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) and Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.) and signed by at least 27 other Republicans who called on Trump to sign a "day-one executive order" to end the free tax-filing program that allowed roughly 140,000 taxpayers to save an estimated $5.6 million in filing costs this year.
Direct File, which was introduced as a pilot program in 12 states in the last tax filing season and is set to be expanded to 24 states and more than 30 million eligible taxpayers this year, is "a free, easy way for people to file their taxes directly online with IRS," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
The software allows taxpayers to keep their entire tax refund "rather than paying $150 to a sleazy tax prep company," said the senator, adding that Republicans evidently want Americans "to keep wasting money on TurboTax," the popular tax filing program run by Intuit, which reported a net income of $2 billion in 2023 and spent $3.5 million on federal lobbying the previous year. The private tax filing industry has spent decades lobbying to ensure a system like Direct File wouldn't be made available to Americans.
In the letter, the Republicans claim the Direct File system is "unauthorized and wasteful" and that "the program's creation and ongoing expansion pose a threat to taxpayers' freedom from government overreach."
The Republican lawmakers also sent the letter to billionaire businessmen Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, Trump's nominees to lead the proposed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
In the letter they claim to want to protect "hardworking Americans" from the "overreach" of the IRS, but as In the Public Interest founder and executive director Donald Cohen told Common Dreams on Wednesday, the Direct File program is "incredibly popular" with those who have used it.
"This is the most efficient way and cost-efficient way for millions of people to pay their taxes," Cohen said. "So what the Republicans want to do is make it more costly, more complicated, and more profitable for the big tax software vendors."
Cohen also questioned how Smith and Edwards could argue, as they do in the letter, that Direct File is a "clear conflict of interest."
"It is in all of our interests for the federal government to... collect taxes in the most efficient and cheapest way," he told Common Dreams.
On the contrary, he said, private tax software companies like Intuit and H&R Block are incentivized to fight against Direct File, which keeps them from collecting about $1 billion in filing fees as well as users' data.
At the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, vice president of tax policy Chuck Marr said Republicans who signed Wednesday's letter are essentially pushing for "a tax on paying taxes."
Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and the former chief economist of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, argued that Direct File "does what policymakers should be in favor of: It makes a core government function more efficient and user-friendly, in a way that's accessible for everyone."
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Wake of UN Climate Summit, Azerbaijan Targets Independent Journalists
"Azerbaijan's international partners should take note and urge the authorities to end the crackdown," said a major human rights group.
Dec 11, 2024
Mere weeks after thousands of delegates descended on Baku, Azerbaijan for the COP29 climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, authorities in the country arrested multiple independent journalists on charges that one prominent human rights group called "bogus."
On December 6, police arrested six employees with the independent media organization Meydan TV: Ramin Deko (Jabrailzade), Aynur Elgunesh (Ganbarova), Aysel Umudova, Aytaj Tapdig (Ahmadova), Khayala Agayeva, and Natig Javadli on suspicion of smuggling, according to a statement from Meydan TV. Another media worker, Ulvi Tahirov, was also arrested that day. All seven have been given four months pretrial detention, according to Human Rights Watch.
In a statement released December 6, Meydan TV—which is headquartered in Berlin—said that "since the day we started our activities over a decade ago, our brave journalists have been arrested, and they and their families have been subjected to persecution. Journalists who cooperate with us have been illegally banned from leaving the country, and have been surveilled by Pegasus spyware, among other forms of pressure." Meydan TV has also called the charges "unfounded" and the detention of its journalists "illegal."
Since launching in 2013, Meydan TV has become one of the most important sources of independent news in Azerbaijan, broadcasting interviews with opposition politicians and publishing investigative reporting, according to the Eurasianet, an outlet that covers South Caucasus and Central Asia.
As part of its coverage of COP29, Meydan TV addressed the scrutiny that the Azerbaijani government has engendered for its human rights record.
Members of the Azerbaijani media were also arrested last year. Reporters with Abzas Media, Toplum TV, and Kanal 13 were arrested in 2023 and remain in pretrial custody, and like those targeted in this most recent wave of arrests they face smuggling charges, according to Human Rights Watch.
"Having created a network of laws and regulations in Azerbaijan designed to make it virtually impossible for journalists and activists carrying out legitimate work in full compliance, the government then invokes such bogus charges as politically convenient to silence critics," wrote Arzu Geybulla, a research assistant with Human Rights Watch.
Geybulla added: "Azerbaijan's international partners should take note and urge the authorities to end the crackdown, including releasing all those arbitrarily detailed, and dropping all politically motivated prosecutions."
Another rights group, Reporters Without Borders, urged the Azerbaijani government to release these journalists, as well as others that have been "arbitrarily detained."
Jeanne Cavelier, head of Reporters Without Borders' Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk, said that "barely a month after Ilham Aliyev's regime used the glitz of COP29 to polish its international image, it has resumed its relentless repression of journalists."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Floats Plan to Let Billionaire Polluters 'Bribe Their Way' Past Regulations
"He's making it official: If you write a big enough check, his administration will let you break the rules and drive up costs for working families," said one climate advocate.
Dec 11, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday floated a legally dubious proposal to let corporations and individuals who invest $1 billion or more in the U.S. bypass regulations, a scheme that environmental groups and government watchdogs said underscores the corrupt intentions of the incoming administration.
"Corporate polluters cannot bribe their way to endangering our communities and our clean air and water," Mahyar Sorour of Sierra Club said in a statement. "Donald Trump's plan to sell out to the highest bidder confirms what we've long known about him: He's happy to sacrifice the wellbeing of American communities for the benefit of his Big Oil campaign donors."
"We will keep fighting to defend our bedrock environmental protections and ensure they apply to everyone, not just those who can't afford Trump's bribe," Sorour added.
In a Truth Social post on Tuesday, Trump wrote that "any person or company investing ONE BILLION DOLLARS, OR MORE, in the United States of America, will receive fully expedited approvals and permits, including, but in no way limited to, all Environmental approvals."
"GET READY TO ROCK!!!" said Trump, who pledged on the campaign trail to accelerate oil drilling and asked the fossil fuel industry to bankroll his bid for a second White House term in exchange for large-scale deregulation.
As early as May of this year, fossil fuel industry lobbyists and lawyers had already begun crafting executive orders for Trump to sign upon retaking the White House. After winning last month's election, Trump moved quickly to stack his Cabinet with billionaires and other rich individuals with close corporate ties, including those in the fossil fuel industry.
The Associated Pressnoted Tuesday that Trump's push to let large investors evade regulations would itself likely run up against regulatory hurdles, "including a landmark law that requires federal agencies to consider the environmental impact before deciding on major projects."
"While Trump did not specify who would be eligible for accelerated approvals, dozens of energy projects proposed nationwide, from natural gas pipelines and export terminals to solar farms and offshore wind turbines, meet the billion-dollar criteria," AP noted. "Environmental groups slammed the proposal, calling it illegal on its face and a clear violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, a 54-year-old law that requires federal agencies to study the potential environmental impact of proposed actions and consider alternatives."
"Presidents have no authority whatsoever to waive statutory public health and safety protections based upon a dollar value of capital investment."
Lena Moffitt, executive director of Evergreen Action, said Tuesday that "Trump is treating America's energy policy like a cheap knickknack at an estate sale: brazenly offering to auction off our public lands and waters to the highest bidder."
"Trump's promise to fast-track environmental approvals for billion-dollar kickbacks is nothing but an illegal giveaway to fossil fuel special interests," said Moffitt, pointing to federal law requiring "rigorous review processes to protect the public interest, not rubber stamps for corporate polluters."
"Trump's plan would turn a system already rigged in favor of fossil fuel interests into one openly driven by corruption, where special interests dictate policy and everyday Americans pay the price," Moffitt added. "Now he's making it official: If you write a big enough check, his administration will let you break the rules and drive up costs for working families."
Axiosreported that Trump's specific focus on environmental regulations "will put the spotlight on Lee Zeldin," the president-elect's pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
"Zeldin is considered to have little environmental policymaking experience—but is a strong supporter of Trump's broad deregulatory push," the outlet noted.
Tyson Slocum, director of the Energy Program at Public Citizen, expressed confidence that Trump's plan "will not come to pass," given that "presidents have no authority whatsoever to waive statutory public health and safety protections based upon a dollar value of capital investment."
"Trump's claim deserves ridicule for being so outlandishly illegal and wrong," said Slocum. "However, the statement does highlight Trump's utter disregard for protecting the environment or human health and the imminent peril that he and his cronies will push policies that jeopardize health, safety, and planetary well-being."
Slocum said there are other "more realistic and insidious" Trump schemes worth guarding against, including his "efforts to use national security designations to force bailouts of coal power plants during his firm term."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) warned in response to the president-elect's Truth Social post that "the Donald Trump-Elon Musk government will be of the billionaire, by the billionaire, and for the billionaire—with one set of rules for the big-money oligarchs and another set for everyone else."
"Clean air and clean water are not and will not be for sale," the senator added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular