Brief amici curiae of Former Abortion Providers, et al. filed.

85 Pages·2016·0.28 MB·English

No. 15-274
================================================================
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
---------------------------------  ---------------------------------
WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH, et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
JOHN HELLERSTEDT, M.D., Commissioner of the
Texas Department of State Health Services, et al.,
Respondents.
---------------------------------  ---------------------------------
On Writ Of Certiorari To The
United States Court Of Appeals
For The Fifth Circuit
---------------------------------  ---------------------------------
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF FORMER
ABORTION PROVIDERS; POST-ABORTIVE
WOMEN AND THEIR FAMILIES;
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PROLIFE
NURSES; AND NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF CATHOLIC NURSES, U.S.A.
IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
---------------------------------  ---------------------------------
LINDA BOSTON SCHLUETER
Counsel of Record
TRINITY LEGAL CENTER
11120 Wurzbach, Suite 206
San Antonio, Texas 78230
210-697-8202
[email protected]
Counsel for Amici Curiae
================================================================
COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS [phone]
WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM
i

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Amici National Association of Prolife Nurses and
National Association of Catholic Nurses, U.S.A. are
nongovernmental corporate entities, and they have no
parent corporations and no publicly held corporations
hold 10 percent or more of their stock.
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Corporate Disclosure Statement ......................... i
Table of Authorities ............................................. v
Statement of Interest of Amici Curiae ................ 1
Summary of the Argument .................................. 2
Argument ............................................................. 4
I. MEDICAL ABORTIONS HAVE DANGER-
OUS AND FATAL PHYSICAL COMPLI-
CATIONS, AND THEREFORE, TEXAS IS
JUSTIFIED IN PROVIDING SAFETY
MEASURES TO PROTECT WOMEN ....... 4
A. H.B. 2 Is Necessary Because of the
Documented Physical Risks and Fatal
Complications of Medical Abortions ..... 5
B. The Real Life Experiences of Women
Demonstrate the Dangers of Medical
Abortions Which Require Ongoing
Medical Treatment .............................. 10
II. WOMEN CONSIDERING A SURGICAL
ABORTION DESERVE THE SAME SAFE-
TY PROTECTIONS AS ANY OTHER
PERSON HAVING OUT-PATIENT SUR-
GERY ......................................................... 13
A. The Protections of H.B. 2 Are Justi-
fied Because Surgical Abortions Pose
Risks of Significant Physical Complica-
tions ..................................................... 14
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS – Continued
Page
B. H.B. 2 Should Be Upheld Because Am-
bulatory Surgical Centers Benefit and
Protect Women and Can Save a Woman’s
Life When There Are Complications ..... 21
C. The Requirement That Doctors Have
Privileges at Local Hospitals Is Im-
plicitly Good for Women and Provides
Continuity of Their Care When Com-
plications Arise .................................... 28
D. Having Hospital Privileges Supports
Roe’s Assumption of a Normal Doctor-
Patient Relationship ........................... 34
III. THIS COURT HAS RECOGNIZED THAT
BROAD DEFERENCE SHOULD BE GIVEN
TO LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND EN-
ACTMENTS, AND THEREFORE, THE
COURT OF APPEALS’ DECISION SHOULD
BE AFFIRMED .......................................... 39
A. Health Issues Are Complex Issues
That Are Fact Bound and Involve
National and State Policy That Are
Best Left to the Legislative Branches
of Government ..................................... 39
B. The H.B. 2 Provisions Are Within
This Court’s Constitutional Framework
and Should Be Upheld ......................... 42
Conclusion............................................................ 46
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS – Continued
Page
Appendices:
Appendix A: Affidavit of Carol Everett ..................... A1
Appendix B: Affidavit of Dr. Noreen Johnson .......... B1
Appendix C: Affidavit of Dr. Mayra Thompson ........ C1
v

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
CASES
Dep’t of Health, Board of Medicine v. Pender-
graft, State of Florida Division of Administra-
tive Hearings, DOH case No. 10-0208 (2010),
available at http://abortiondocs.org/wp-content/
uploads/2012/01/pendfinal012610.pdf .................... 37
Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973) ............................. 39
Dominion Hotel v. State of Arizona, 249 U.S.
265 (1919) ................................................................ 39
Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1 (1824) ......... 39
Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124
(2007) ............................................... 18, 20, 39, 40, 41
McCormack v. Hiedeman, 694 F.3d 1004 (9th
Cir. 2012) ................................................................. 41
McCorvey v. Hill, 385 F.3d 846 (5th Cir. 2004) ..... 44, 45
Mendoza v. Karpen et al., Docket number 2014-
12321, available at http://operationrescue.org/
pdfs/Mendoza%20v%20Karpen%20botched%
20abortion%20lawsuit.pdf ...................................... 25
Planned Parenthood v. Abbott, 748 F.3d 583
(5th Cir. 2014) ................................................... 30, 38
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833
(1992) ........................................................... 13, 40, 42
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) ....................... passim
vi

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. F.C.C., 520
U.S. 180 (1997) ........................................................ 39
Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole, 790 F.3d 563
(5th Cir. 2015) ......................................................... 29

STATUTES
ALA. CODE § 26-23E-4 ................................................. 28
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 36-449.03 ....................................... 28
ARK. CODE ANN. § 20-16-1504 ..................................... 28
FLA. STAT. § 390.012 .................................................... 28
IND. CODE § 16-34-2-4.5 .............................................. 28
KAN. STAT. ANN. § 65-4a09 .......................................... 28
LA. STAT. ANN. § 40:1299.35.2 ..................................... 28
MISS. CODE ANN. § 41-75-1 ......................................... 28
MO. REV. STAT. § 188.080 ............................................ 28
N.D. CENT. CODE § 14-02.1-04 .................................... 28
OKLA. STAT. TIT. 63, § 1-748 ........................................ 28
TENN. CODE ANN. § 39-15-202 ..................................... 28
TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 171.001 et
seq. ........................................................................... 42
TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 171.0031 ........... 28
TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 243.010 .... 21, 22, 24
TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 245.010 ............. 43
vii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
UTAH ADMIN. CODE R. 432-600-13 .............................. 28
WIS. STAT. § 253.095 ................................................... 28

OTHER
A Woman’s Right to Know, available at https://
www.dshs.state.tx.us/wrtk/default.shtm ............... 42
A Woman’s Right to Know: Casey-style Informed
Consent Laws, available at http://www.
nrlc.org/uploads/stateleg/WRTKFactSheet.pdf ....... 42
Abortion Pill Risks: Just the Facts, Holly Pat-
terson’s Story, available at http://abortionpill
risks.org/real-stories/hollys-story/ .............. 11, 12, 13
Ambulatory Surgical Center Association, History
of ASCs, available at http://www.ascassociation.
org/advancingsurgicalcare/whatisanasc/history
ofascs ....................................................................... 21
Ambulatory Surgical Center Association, Qual-
ity of Care in ASCs, available at http://
www.ascassociation.org/advancingsurgicalcare/
qualityandpatientsafety/qualityofcareinascs ......... 23
American College of Surgeons, Statement of
Principles, subsection F, available at https://
www.facs.org/about-acs/statements/stonprin#
anchor172291 .......................................................... 31
viii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
American Psychiatric Association, APA Abortion
Report (2008), available at http://www.
abortionrisks.org/index.php?title=APA_Abortion_
Report#Others_Recommending_Screening_and_
Doctor.27s_Obligation ....................................... 18, 19
Bennington Banner, Trial Set for Mass. Doc in
Abortion Patient Death (Sept. 13, 2010),
available at http://www.benningtonbanner.
com/news/ci_16067872 ............................................ 27
Calhoun, Stopping Philadelphia Abortion Pro-
vider Kermit Gosnell and Preventing Others
Like Him: An Outcome that Both Pro-choicers
and Pro-lifers Should Support, 57 VILL. L.
REV. 1 (2012) ........................................................... 24
Congressional Staff Report, The FDA and RU-
486: Lowering the Standard for Women’s
Health, prepared for the Chairman of the
House Subcommittee on Criminal Justice,
Drug Policy and Human Resources (Oct. 2006),
archived at http://old.usccb.org/prolife/issues/
ru486/SouderStaffReportonRU-486.pdf ........... 5, 6, 7
Danco’s MIFEPREX™ Label, available at
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/
label/2000/20687lbl.htm ........................................... 5
Dewhurst, One Year Later: HB 2 and the Pro-Life
Movement in Texas (Jul. 18, 2014), available at
http://townhall.com/columnists/daviddewhurst/
2014/07/18/one-year-later-hb-2-and-the-prolife-
movement-in-texas-n1863568/page/full ........... 43, 44
ix

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Elliot Institute, Abortion Complications, avail-
able at http://afterabortion.org/1990/abortion-
complications/ .......................................................... 32
Elliot Institute, Abortions Increase Risk of
Maternal Death: New Study, available at
http://afterabortion.org/2012/multiple-abortions-
increase-risk-of-maternal-death-new-study/ ......... 16
Elliot Institute, Abortion Risks: A List of Major
Physical Complications Related to Abortion,
available at http://afterabortion.org/1999/abortion-
risks-a-list-of-major-physical-complications-
related-to-abortion/ ........................................... 18, 32
Enriquez, “Texas Gosnell” Douglas Karpen No
Longer Terminating Unborn Texans (June
15, 2014), available at http://liveactionnews.
org/texas-gosnell-douglas-karpen-no-longer-
terminating-unborn-texans/ ................................... 25
Food and Drug Administration, Mifeprex (mife-
pristone) Information (07/17/2015), available
at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/Post
marketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsand
Providers/ucm111323.htm .................................... 8, 9
Food and Drug Administration, Mifepristone U.S.
Postmarketing Adverse Events Summary
Through 04/30/2011 (July 2011), available at
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DrugSafety/
PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatients
andProviders/UCM263353.pdf ................................. 8