Bill Requiring Parental Consent for Abortion Headed to House Floor
Bill sponsor Erin Grall shrugged off criticism that the bill was being fast-tracked, telling members that the House last year debated a virtually identical bill for more than seven and a half hours.
October 24, 2019 at 02:19 PM
4 minute read
Setting up a potential test case for Florida's recently revamped Supreme Court, a House panel approved a bill that would require pregnant girls under age 18 to get consent from their parents before obtaining abortions.
Members of the House Health and Human Services Committee spent more than two hours debating the bill and hearing from dozens of members of the public before voting along party lines to pass the measure (HB 265). It was the only committee stop for the bill, meaning it can be voted on by the full House when the 2020 legislative session begins in January.
Bill sponsor Erin Grall, R-Vero Beach, shrugged off criticism that the bill was being fast-tracked, telling members that the House last year debated a virtually identical bill for more than seven and a half hours.
"The makeup of this [House] body is substantially the same. The content of the bill is identical. And so I feel like we've had these conversations," Grall said.
Senators have not considered the Senate version of the measure (SB 404), which has been sent to three committees.
If ultimately passed, the proposal would ban physicians from performing abortions on minors unless the physicians receive notarized, written parental consent or court orders waiving the parental consent requirement.
The measure drew passionate debate from people on both sides of the issue, as speakers varied in age from college students to 70-year-old preachers.
American Civil Liberties Union of Florida legislative director Kara Gross testified that the bill would put an undue burden on young women's constitutional rights. If passed, she said, the measure would force minors to have children.
"If a parent doesn't consent and a child isn't able to go to court or isn't able to convince a judge, under this bill, the child will be forced to have a child," Gross said. "No child should be forced to have a child against her will. There is no greater governmental intrusion."
But Ingrid Delgado, with the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the bill transcends abortion rights.
"This bill shouldn't be about whether we support or oppose abortion, but rather about the unique role of parents in their children's lives, particularly when the outcomes are permanent," Delgado said.
Supporters and opponents of the legislation agreed that the bill could be a test case for the reconstituted Florida Supreme Court, which struck down a parental-consent law in 1989.
The court decidedly is more conservative than previous courts, after longtime Justices Barbara Pariente, R. Fred Lewis and Peggy Quince stepped down in January because of a mandatory retirement age. Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed more conservative justices — Barbara Lagoa, Robert Luck and Carlos Muniz — to replace them.
Florida law already requires parents to be notified if their daughters are planning to have abortions. The law also provides for a judicial waiver process that allows pregnant teenagers to circumvent the requirement.
According to a House staff analysis, 224 petitions for waiver of the parental-notification requirement were filed in 2017. The court granted 205 of them. In 2018, minors filed 193 petitions of which 182 were granted.
But the bill would go further by requiring parental consent, rather than notification. Similar to the current notification requirement, the bill would allow exemptions for teens who already are parents or are in medical emergencies.
Grall said there was no need to expand those exemptions to cover girls who have been raped or who have been victims of human trafficking.
But Rep. Shevrin Jones, D-West Park, said that wasn't the case.
"Are we serious? you want to tell the parent about human trafficking? What if the parent is the one trafficking the child?" Jones said, also arguing that the Legislature should address sex education and access to birth control to prevent unintended pregnancies.
"Of course, we are going to disagree on this issue," Jones said. "But I'm asking that we change our conversation. And change the topic and think about the unintended consequences that will come along with this."
Christine Sexton reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFla.'s Statute of Limitations and Statutes of Repose in Med Mal Cases: It's Not Over Until It's Over
6 minute readGC of Florida State Agency Steps Down After Threatening TV Stations That Aired Abortion-Rights Ad
Trending Stories
- 1Florida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
- 2Supreme Court Drops Facebook's Appeal in Securities Case as 'Improvidently Granted'
- 3Newsmakers: Scott Bailey Joins Jones Day’s Corporate Practice in Dallas
- 4The Swinging Pendulum of Title IX Politics
- 5The Big Weakness of Legal AI
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250