JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE NEWSBURSTDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.


Friday, March 02, 2012

Virginia House passes amended version of bill requiring ultrasound before abortion
Jerry Votava at 12:44 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Virginia House of Delegates [official website] passed a bill [text] on Thursday that would require a woman seeking an abortion [JURIST news archive] to have an ultrasound before the procedure. The bill was passed [JURIST report] by the Virginia Senate [official website], and is a scaled-back version of a similar bill [text] that was voted on [JURIST report] earlier this month. The current version of the bill removes the requirement for a transvaginal ultrasound to be performed, but continues to require a traditional transabdominal ultrasound. The bill retains the requirement that the women be provided with information regarding the gestational age and physical development of the fetus. In addition to altering the ultrasound requirements, the updated legislation redacts the portion of the previous version that would have required the medical professional to give the woman the option of listening to the fetal heart tone. The contentious bill was approved [results] by a margin of 65 to 31.

Virignia is not the first state to pass such legislation, and similar rules have drawn various results when challenged in the court system. Last month the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit [official website] lifted an injunction [JURIST report] on a Texas law [JURIST report] that requires women to have a sonogram before undergoing an abortion, allowing the law to be enforced. In October, a judge for the US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina [official website] issued a preliminary injunction [JURIST report], blocking part of the state's abortion law that required a physician to perform an ultrasound and describe the images to the patient. In March 2010 the Supreme Court of Oklahoma [official website] ruled [JURIST report] that a state law [SB 1878, DOC] imposing broad restrictions on abortion, including the requirement of an ultrasound prior to the procedure, violated that state's constitution.




Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST LEGAL NEWS

 Senate Judiciary Committee approves immigration reform bill
12:45 PM ET, May 22

 Zimbabwe president signs new constitution into law
11:09 AM ET, May 22

 Ninth Circuit strikes down Arizona 20-week abortion ban
9:47 AM ET, May 22

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

LATEST FORUM

The War on Terror and the Need for Muslim Support
DOMESTIC
Faisal Kutty
Valparaiso University Law School

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org