 |
|
 Legal news from Saturday, October 6, 2012 |
|
|
Federal judge holds hearing on Arizona abortion funding law
Jaimie Cremeans on October 6, 2012 3:18 PM ET
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the District of Arizona [official website] held a hearing on Friday at the request of Planned Parenthood Arizona (PPA) [advocacy website] to determine whether, under an Arizona law [text, PDF] prohibiting state funding to facilities that perform abortions, such facilities will still be paid for low-income residents' gynecological exams and other services not related to abortion. During the hearing judge Neil Wake questioned state attorneys [AP report] regarding possible harm that could result from letting the law take effect before a trial, and indicated that he saw potential for "great harm" to women's health. The state argued that the law should take effect because it reflects the "will of the taxpayers" and legislators, while opponents of the law argued that it would cause negative effects to women who would be forced to abruptly switch doctors. Other issues to be decided after the hearing are whether PPA and other affected facilities have standing to challenge the law's constitutionality or if the challenge would have to come from the federal government, and whether or not the law should be allowed to take effect pending a trial challenging its constitutionality. Wake did not yet make a ruling on any of the issues so far presented.
Arizona is currently facing multiple lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of recently passed abortion restrictions. Last month a federal court issued an emergency injunction [JURIST report] against an Arizona law that prohibits abortions after 20 weeks into a pregnancy except for in medical emergencies, which was challenged [JURIST report] by the Center for Reproductive Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union [advocacy websites] in July. PPA also filed its suit [JURIST report] challenging the funding law in July, claiming the law violates federal laws regarding Medicaid patients' rights by restricting their rights to choose physicians. The law restricting funding to abortion clinics was signed by Governor Jan Brewer in May [Reuters report], while the law banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy was signed in April [JURIST report].
Link |
|
subscribe |
 |
latest newscast |
archive |
 Facebook page
|
California resident sues four Orange County cities over sex offender ordinances
Jaimie Cremeans on October 6, 2012 2:41 PM ET
[JURIST] A registered sex offender filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of California [official website] last week challenging ordinances in four Orange County cities that ban registered sex offenders from city-owned parks, campgrounds and other recreational areas where children may gather. The city ordinances were all modeled after a 2011 Orange County ordinance [press release] that prohibits registered sex offenders from entering any county-owned parks or recreational areas. The plaintiff is an Orange County resident who alleges that the laws violate his First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment [Cornell LII backgrounders] rights by denying him freedom to assemble peacefully and by taking away his rights without due process of the law. He also alleges that the ban amounts to an unconstitutional additional punishment for his crime, as he has already served the full sentence under his conviction of fifteen years ago. The cities being sued are Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Seal Beach and Lake Forest. The chief of staff of the Orange County District Attorney's office defended [LA Times report] the city ordinances, stating that the office will work with the cities' attorneys to fight the lawsuit and noting that fourteen Orange County cities have adopted sex offender rules on recommendation by the district attorney. The unnamed plaintiff reportedly is married and has children.
The rights of convicted sex offenders has been the subject of many constitutional-based lawsuits. In January the US Supreme Court [official website] ruled 7-2 [JURIST report] that people who were convicted of sex offenses before the enactment of the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act [final guidelines, PDF] did not have to register under the act until the attorney general validly specified that the provisions applied to them. A few days earlier, a federal appeals court struck down [JURIST report] a city ordinance that banned sex offenders from libraries in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Last year the American Civil Liberties Union [advocacy website] also challenged [JURIST report] a Louisiana law that limited Internet use for registered sex offenders. In 2010, a federal appeals court upheld [JURIST report] indefinite detention of mentally ill sex offenders as constitutional.
Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page
|
| For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...
|
|
|
