NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

Judge turns down pro-abortion lawsuit asking for TRO against Texas admitting privileges law

by | Apr 17, 2014

 

By Dave Andrusko

Judge Lee Yeakel

Judge Lee Yeakel

On Wednesday District Judge Lee Yeakel, who usually lends a sympathetic ear to pro-abortion ligitants, rejected a request for a temporary restraining order against the part of Texas’s HB 2 that requires abortionists to obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of an abortion facility.

In truth, he had no choice.

“All challenges must be viewed through the prism of the 5th Circuit’s overall view of the law as expressed at the present time,” Yeakel said. He was alluding to the unanimous decision upholding provisions of H.B. 2 that had been challenged by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), and several Texas abortion clinics.

As the Houston Chronicle explained, Yeakel

“said that in order for him to grant the temporary restraining order sought by abortion providers, they would have to satisfy several tests including a substantial likelihood of success in their lawsuit against the requirement.

“Yeakel said that since a panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law only weeks ago, they can’t meet that requirement.”

At issue was Reproductive Services, an abortion clinic in El Paso. The clinic had temporary admitting privileges through a local hospital but then lost them.

Stephanie Toti, CRR attorney

Stephanie Toti, CRR attorney

Stephanie Toti, a senior staff attorney for the CRR, told Yeakel that the admitting privileges rule would force women seeking an abortion in El Paso to travel to New Mexico, where there is no admitting privileges requirement.

Writing for the Texas Tribune, Cathaleen Qiao Chen reported the state of Texas’s response.

“State attorney Jimmy Blacklock argued that the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals already rejected these claims in another lawsuit — filed by the same coalition of abortion providers — that challenged the hospital admitting privileges provision.”

“’It feels like we were just here,’ Blacklock said. ‘We’ve got the same parties, the same lawyers, and the 5th Circuit has just ruled and we’re all bound to follow that decision.’”

This particular request for a TRO is part of a complicated set of lawsuits in which when pro-abortionists lose one lawsuit and then file another (in this case the El Paso abortion clinic). Plaintiffs are also challenging the provision of HB 2 requiring abortions clinics to meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centers. That provision goes into effect September 1.

However, as NRL News Today has reported, pro-abortionists avoided the part of the 2013 law that prohibits killing unborn children who have reached the developmental milestone of being able to feel pain which substantial medical evidence places at 20 weeks. Pro-abortionists are leery about taking on a law that clearly demonstrates that the pain-capable unborn child is a living member of the human family worthy of protection.

That part of the law went unchallenged and took effect last October.

Please join those who are following me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha. Send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com.

Categories: Judicial Legislation
Tags: HB 2