Wisconsin’s Anti-Abortion Bills: The National Connection
In his order, Conley found that the requirement wasn’t necessary for maternal health and the state therefore had no reason to implement this mandate:
As reflected in the immediate section above, there will almost certainly be irreparable harm to those women who will be foreclosed from having an abortion in the next week either because of the undue burden of travel or the late stage of pregnancy, as well as facing increasing health risks caused by delay. Since the State has failed to date to demonstrate any benefit to maternal health of imposing this restriction, there is no meaningful counterweight recognized by the United States Supreme Court to justify the Act’s immediate enforcement.
Conley will hear arguments for an injunction on July 17.
Unfortunately, the admitting privileges mandate was only part of this extremist bill.
The rest of the bill
requires women seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound—in most cases, a
trans-vaginal ultrasound—and hear descriptions of and view her fetus.
Not surprisingly, no member of Wisconsin’s medical community supported Act 37, which was initiated by state Sen. Mary Lazich of New Berlin.
But of course its origins lie elsewhere.
As I detail in
tomorrow’s issue of the Shepherd, this anti-abortion bill, like the others
working their way through the state Legislature, is inspired by model
legislation drafted by the national anti-abortion group Americans United for
AUL denied that they
had a hand in any of the Wisconsin bills.
But if you take a
look at the model bills available on AUL’s website, you’ll see that they’re
quite familiar, both to Wisconsinites and folks around the country. Defunding
Planned Parenthood. Banning gender-based abortions. Outlawing abortions after
20 weeks. Conscience clauses. And so on.
Not much has been
written about AUL in the mainstream press but The Guardian took the lead on it