Reproductive Justice Groups Sue Kemp to Block Abortion Ban
“This law is an affront to the dignity and health of Georgians,” said a 38-page complaint filed in federal court Friday.
June 28, 2019 at 09:17 AM
5 minute read
SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective and numerous others sued Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Attorney General Chris Carr and prosecutors around the state in federal court Friday seeking to block enforcement of an abortion ban set to go into effect Jan. 1.
The 38-page complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in Atlanta is a constitutional challenge to House Bill 481, “which bans practically all abortions,” the filing said. “This law is an affront to the dignity and health of Georgians.”
The complaint said the law is “in particular an attack on low-income Georgians, Georgians of color, and rural Georgians, who are least able to access medical care and least able to overcome the cruelties of this law.” The lead plaintiff, SisterSong, is a Georgia-based nonprofit organization formed in 1997 by 16 groups led by and representing indigenous, black, Latinx, and Asian American women, as well as trans people.
“By asserting the human right to reproductive justice, SisterSong works to build an effective network of individuals and organizations addressing institutional policies, systems, and cultural practices that limit the reproductive lives of marginalized people,” the lawsuit said.
The other plaintiffs include Feminist Women's Health Center of DeKalb County, Planned Parenthood Southeast, other medical facilities around the state and physicians and staff suing on behalf of themselves and their patients.
“Georgians face a critical shortage of reproductive health care providers, including obstetrician-gynecologists, and the rate at which Georgians, particularly Black Georgians, die from pregnancy-related causes is among the highest in the nation,” the complaint said. “Rather than working to end those preventable deaths, and rather than honoring Georgians' reproductive health care decisions, the Legislature has instead chosen to criminalize abortion from the earliest stages of pregnancy.”
The Legislature passed the ban in March. The governor signed it in May. It will be the attorney general's responsibility to defend the state.
The governor's office declined to comment Friday, referring inquiries to the attorney general. The AG's spokeswoman said, “We cannot comment on pending litigation.”
“The law criminalizes pre-viability abortions in direct conflict with Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), and nearly a half century of Supreme Court precedent reaffirming Roe's central holding,” the complaint said. “Specifically, it criminalizes abortion after embryonic cardiac activity is detectable, which generally occurs around six weeks in pregnancy, when many people are unaware they are pregnant. The law undermines a woman's 'ability … to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation,' which 'has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.' Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 856 (1992).”
“These are serious decisions,” Andrea Young, a lawyer and the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, told the Daily Report. “Roe very carefully weighs at what point the government has an interest.” Before viability, she said, “government does not have an interest that outweighs the right to privacy and the ability of women to decide.”
She said the “heartbeat” language for “embryonic cardiac activity” is “intended to obscure how far from viability this line is being drawn.”
“Everyone trying to recruit talent to their law firms should be worried,” she said. “Atlanta has this incredible reputation as a place that is welcoming of diversity. What matters is what you bring to the table. Hard work. Brains. Now we've got the Legislature saying 'no, we have a group of second-class citizens who don't get to control their lives.'”
The plaintiffs are being represented by lawyers with the American Civil Liberties Union in Atlanta and New York and with Planned Parenthood in Washington and New York.
“It's a team effort. Everyone is working really hard on this,” ACLU Georgia Legal Director Sean J. Young told the Daily Report.
He said the strategy is to sue every state official who has the authority to enforce the law, press criminal charges or impose professional punishments on medical providers. He said Georgia law gives the governor the power to direct DAs and the AG to prosecute, even if they disagree with a law. So all prosecutors in areas where the plaintiffs have business have been sued. So have the members of the Georgia Composite Medical Board and the commissioner of the Department of Public Health, because of their authority over doctors.
The complaint seeks a preliminary injunction in advance of the Jan. 1 effective date and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from enforcing the law. The complaint also calls on the court to enter a judgment declaring that H.B. 481 violates the 14th Amendment and to award attorney fees and costs.
The complaint also provides details of health risks of pregnancy not addressed by the ban, which allows exceptions only for rape when a police report is filed, medical emergencies imminently threatening the mother's life or diagnoses of medical futility for the child.
“Forcing women to continue their pregnancy against their will can expose them to serious health risks that are not covered by the narrow emergency exception in the law,” Young said. “This bill was designed to support the abortion ban. The sponsors erroneously believed that using personhood could get them out from under Roe v. Wade. But thankfully, politicians cannot rewrite the Constitution.”
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 AllInsurer Not Required to Cover $29M Wrongful Death Judgment, Appeals Court Rules
After 2024's Regulatory Tsunami, Financial Services Firms Hope Storm Clouds Break
Trending Stories
- 1Lawyer’s Resolutions: Focusing on 2025
- 2Houston Judge Exonerated on Appeal, Public Reprimand Vacated
- 3Bar Report - Dec. 30
- 4Employment Law Developments to Expect From the Second Trump Administration
- 5How I Made Law Firm Leadership: 'It’s Imperative That You Never Stop Learning,' Says Ian Ribald of Ballard Spahr
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