Blaming clinics for their own harassment, making violent insinuations, giving a convicted terrorist a leadership position, railroading good doctors out of business, and claiming that 10-year-old rape victims are better off being forced to give birth: Welcome to the anti-choice movement of 2013.
This week, Mark Gietzen, chairman of the Kansas Coalition for Life, told the Huffington Post that he thinks South Wind Director Julie Burkhart is “trying to provoke an incident so she can say, ‘Look, these pro-lifers did something.'”
Representatives from the groups argue that the area should be re-zoned to disallow abortions, citing “graphic signs” that children can see if they pass the clinic. Individuals affiliated with some of the groups have been known to protest with graphic signs at the clinic.
If accepted by the federal court, Planned Parenthood would narrow its legal challenge to a requirement that providers link to state-sponsored anti-abortion materials on their websites.
In a state known for regressive and harmful social policies and a proliferation of socially conservative Democratic electeds, will the Democrats produce another “me-too Democrat” or a truly progressive candidate who will be the antithesis of Brownback?
The ban received a hearing during the regular session, but now anti-choice activists would like to see it receive a vote.
A flurry of legal activity over state-level abortion restrictions occupied much of the federal court’s attention last week.
I asked several lawyer colleagues if they knew of other instances in which a whole occupational category was banned by law from volunteering in schools. They did not. Indeed, as far as I can tell, only sex offenders as a class are de facto banned from school grounds.
Last week the Roberts Court gave us mostly bad news, while advocates at the state level are pushing back against TRAP laws.
The state of Kansas must now defend two lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of HB 2253.