By Dave Andrusko

Oklahoma County District Court Judge Bill Graves
Another day, another defeat for pro-abortionists–and another appeal to a higher court.
On Wednesday night, hours after formally losing a challenge to Oklahoma’s law on chemical abortions, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) filed an emergency appeal asking the Oklahoma Supreme Court to block HB 2684 from taking effect November 1.
Earlier in the day Oklahoma District Court Judge Roger Stuart finalized what he announced from the bench last week: that he would not block the law [http://nrlc.cc/1tVsJXM].
As NRL News Today reported, HB 2684 was passed after the Oklahoma Supreme Court affirmed District Judge Donald Worthington’s decision striking down a 2011 law. The state Supreme Court ruled that the original law was so broad that it would ban all chemical abortion. The new law requires the FDA protocol to be used when dispensing RU-486.
The most important FDA requirements were that the abortifacient not be used past the seventh week (a limitation which PPFA and other abortion providers freely concede they ignore); that abortionists use three RU486 pills, rather than one; and that the accompanying prostaglandin (misoprostol) be administered by mouth, not vaginally.
CRR brought the lawsuit on behalf of Reproductive Services in Tulsa and the Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Services.
CRR already has a request for an emergency stay on another Oklahoma law–SB 1848—brought on behalf of abortionist Larry Burns, whom performs nearly half the state’s abortions, according to CRR.
Their target is the requirement that clinics have an abortionist who has admitting privileges with a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic for when the inevitable complications occur. The law is also scheduled to go into effect November 1.
Last week Oklahoma County District Court Judge Bill Graves, in a sparse but pointed four-page ruling, held that SB 1848 could take effect. Judge Graves rejected all of CRR’s arguments, including its assertion that the law violated the “single subject” rule and that it was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to hospital boards.
Judges Graves also noted that Burns had been extremely slow in attempting to secure admitting privileges. “Plaintiff waited 77 days before applying for admitting privileges,” he wrote. “If he has not heard back from all of the places to which he has applied, it is his own fault and there is no violation of due process” [http://nrlc.cc/1rDO69s].