NRL News

Tennessee tells 6th Circuit Court its 48 hour waiting period is clearly constitutional

by | Feb 11, 2021

By Dave Andrusko

Back in mid-December, we reported on the utterly predictable decision rendered by Senior United States District Judge Bernard A. Friedman who brusquely brushed aside Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery’s request that Friedman put his order enjoining enforcement of Tennessee’s 48-hour waiting period on hold while the state appealed to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Flash forward, and I am trying to secure a copy of the brief filed by the state with the 6th Circuit mentioned in a story that appeared in Bloomberg Law on Wednesday.

 “Tennessee is the only state that currently can’t enforce a waiting period law, as there hasn’t been a successful federal constitutional challenge to one upheld on appeal in the nearly 30 years since the U.S.,” Legal Reporter Mary Anne Pazanowski wrote

Which, of course, is the position Tennessee has taken from the get-go. Waiting periods have been upheld by courts for decades. 

In addition, when Judge Friedman handed down his decision to enjoin on October 14, 2020, the president of Tennessee Right to Life, observed, “Not only is this decision a slap at Tennessee’s abortion-vulnerable women, it is an affront to Tennessee’s voters who passed a 2014 constitutional amendment in which allowing a short waiting period was a key factor.” 

 As NRL News Today has reported on multiple occasions, Tennessee has been very busy passing pro-life legislation. That includes, to name just two, informed consent legislation informing women about to undergo a chemical abortion that if they change their minds after taking only the first of two drugs, they may well be able to save their babies. 

Another bans abortions when the abortionist knows that the woman is doing so because of the child’s sex or race or if he knows the woman is seeking an abortion because of a diagnosis of Down syndrome.

Categories: Waiting period