WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 /Christian Newswire/ -- Attorneys with Americans United for Life filed a brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that Arizona's 2009 informed consent law is a constitutionally-appropriate expression of the state's legitimate interest in safeguarding the health of women considering abortions.
"Abortion providers in Arizona are making it clear that they aren't protecting women's health," noted AUL's lead attorney Mailee Smith, "rather their priority is getting paid."
In 2009, Arizona enacted a law mandating that a woman considering abortion must receive information about its risks and also about the alternatives. The law also requires a 24-hour reflection period before the woman may actually undergo an abortion, and it prohibits abortion providers from collecting payment prior to the expiration of the reflection period.
In September 2009, Arizona abortion providers filed legal challenges to the law in both federal and state courts, requesting that it be enjoined and declared unconstitutional. A federal district court later refused to enjoin the law and abortion providers have elected to appeal the enforcement of the payment restrictions to the 9th Circuit.
State Representative Nancy Barto, AUL's client and a principal sponsor of the legislation, remarked during a February 2009 hearing on the measure, that the State of Arizona has demonstrated a commitment to "protecting Arizonans' right to make informed decisions about their medical care."
Amicus Brief:
http://blog.aul.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/AUL- Tucson-v.-AZ-Amicus-Brief.pdf
AUL Amicus Briefs:
http://aul.org/Amicus_Briefs
SOURCE: AMERICANS UNITED FOR LIFE: The first national pro-life organization in America
