U.S. to Drop Fight for Hospital Abortion Records (1 day after DC March)

[displacedtexan]

This was reported yesterday, but a DU search produced no results of prior posts. The story was filed after 6PM, which meant that it wouldn't be featured on network news programs last night.
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

U.S. to Drop Fight for Hospital Abortion Records
Mon Apr 26, 2004 06:23 PM ET


By Gail Appleson

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. government said on Monday it planned to drop its fight to obtain patient abortion records from a Manhattan hospital so a widely watched trial challenging a 2003 federal abortion ban could conclude.

snip

A government lawyer told Casey there was no way to know how long it would take the appeals process to conclude.

"The trial is over, the evidence is in. There is an important and substantial public interest in having a prompt decision on the constitutionality of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003," said Sheila Gowan, assistant U.S. attorney.

"The government would like resolution of the important issue before your Honor as quickly as possible. To that end ... we have determined to voluntarily withdraw the subpoena."

more...
http://tinyurl.com/3ycot

[Gman]

1. Do you think they got the message Sunday?

Just maybe!

[displacedtexan]

2. Yep! I think that message was loud and clear!

Women have the power either to elect or to defeat Bush*! His biggest mistake was trying to marginalize them.

[Catfight]

5. Hopefully they vote their voice too. n/t

[Tyler Durden]

3. Nope.

Remember that * never once came out in the Campaign as "Anti-Abortion." He just let his supporters assume that.

They assumed correctly, it's just that it made him look more moderate. That is, of course, if you can mistake a duck for a condor.

[liberalitch]

6. Didn't he once PAY to end a pregnancy?

I heard that once

[Gman]

8. Yes * did!

* also had a woman murdered in Rosenberg, TX that filed a lawsuit against him for rape.

[LeahMira]

7. Partly, maybe...

Do you think they got the message Sunday?

... but let's look at the reason why they were looking at those records in the first place.

I think the goal was to collect statistical data that would indicate that a large percentage of those late-term abortions were not necessary to save the life of the woman, or else to prove that it would be possible, perhaps with a C-section, to have saved both the woman and the fetus.

These are the arguments that the right-wing has used for ages... that it's possible to save the fetus as well as the mother if the woman's life and health are a concern, and that late-term abortions are performed because of reasons like the woman realized, after eight months, that she wasn't going to get the man to marry her because of the baby on the way after all.

As I've said elsewhere, there are probably always going to be a rare few women who do have a late-term abortion for what others would consider insufficient or immoral sorts of reasons. We don't make laws restricting freedom based on the actions of a few. That would be patently unfair to the overwhelming majority of people who take their responsibilities very seriously and deserve the right to decide for themselves what the proper course of action is for themselves in the unique circumstances in which they find themselves.

In addition, anyone who is really interested in finding out exactly what is involved in a late-term abortion can search the internet and find out about the preparations that must be made before the abortion takes place. Several days of serious discomfort are necessary before the procedure takes place. No woman can walk in to a clinic and demand a late-term abortion that day... sandwiched in between her shopping trip and her lunch with her lady friends.

I think the right wingers just realized... finally... that it would take months, if not years, to assemble the sort of data they would need to make their spurious case, what with the legal challenges and all. Probably they also realized that whatever data they might eventually be able to gather would not support their contention that women were having late term abortions for frivolous reasons... that the women's lives really did hang in the balance.

Sunday's march may have convinced them that it would be a long, hard fight to get the data they wanted, but I'd guess that whatever information they may already have accessed demonstrated that this "fishing expedition" was not going to help their case at all.

The downside of it is that lacking proof one way or the other, the right wing can still make the same sorts of accusations that it's been making all along. There's no data available to prove them wrong.

Still, I believe it's a victory for everyone in the long run. If they managed to access medical records of women who had late term abortions, there would be nothing to stop insurance companies, for instance, to access medical information that might indicate a high risk of developing a particular disease (like the presence of the BRCA gene for breast cancer). Many lives will be saved because care is available to everyone... not simply those who are never sick in the first place.

[Scooter24]

4. This could be a sign...

...that the Government is expecting to lose its case. I think the * administration would want this case resolved before they depart the white house in January. A quick decision would allow them time to get this case on the Supreme Court docket for October.