Saturday, August 22, 2009

Federal court upholds key life affirmation in South Dakota abortion law

Although the court struck down statutory language that required abortionists to warn women that the "procedure" could result in post-event depression or suicide, the decision affirmed that South Dakota's informed consent language -

“an abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being”

expresses fact and that SD Planned Parenthood must use that specific language in asking a woman's consent for an abortion. PP had attempted to use shifty language to evade the statute's clarity.

Here is the press release from Vote Yes For Life:

“Historical Ruling: Abortionists Must Disclose to Women That Abortion Ends a Human Life – Tape Reveals Planned Parenthood Continues to Break Law”

Sioux Falls, SD, August 20, 2009 – The U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota issued its decision today, on a series of Summary Judgment Motions in the historic case of Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, Alpha Center et al.

For four years, Planned Parenthood, the State of South Dakota and the Intervenors, including Alpha Center in Sioux Falls, have litigated the constitutionality of South Dakota’s historic 2005 Abortion Informed Consent Law, which mandated certain written disclosures be provided to a pregnant mother considering an abortion, before a consent could be taken. The Intervenors are gratified that the Court correctly ruled in favor of the Intervenors and the State Defendants on the Human Being Disclosure.


In June 2008, the Intervenors and the State Defendants won an appeal before an en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals, reversing the District Court. The U.S. Court of Appeals held that the required disclosure that “an abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being” was a statement of fact and there was no evidence that it was not true and accurate. Today, the District Court entered Summary Judgment requiring Planned Parenthood to make the disclosure using the language of the Statute. The District Court ruled that the U.S. Court of Appeals had unequivocally held that the language of the Statute had to be used.


The District Court, while ruling to uphold most of the Statute, again committed error in striking down the “Relationship Disclosures.” The Statute requires the doctor to inform the pregnant mother “that the pregnant woman has an existing relationship with that unborn human being and that the relationship enjoys protection under the United States Constitution and under the laws of South Dakota.” The Statute also requires the disclosure that that protected relationship will be terminated by the abortion procedure.

We are completely confident that this aspect of the Court’s decision of today will be reversed on appeal.

This presents an important issue for the women of South Dakota and elsewhere. It is the utter devaluation and contempt by Planned Parenthood for the mother’s relationship and rights that has resulted in so many women losing children they would not have lost if they were properly counseled and sufficient respect for the mother’s rights were evidenced. We feel the appeal on this issue will be of particular importance for the women, but it will also provide the U.S. Supreme Court with the opportunity to clarify the ambiguous language of Roe v. Wade that has so confounded lower courts and confused the District Court in this case.

The disclosure involves the simple explanation that a second human being is already in existence, and that the unique relationship the pregnant woman has with that second human being enjoys legal protection under the U.S. Constitution and the laws of South Dakota. The Court confused the language in Roe v. Wade that spoke of constitutional rights with the language of the Statute that speaks of a relationship in fact.

We are confident the Intervenors and the State will succeed on appeal in both the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court.


The South Dakota Legislature concluded, based upon competent peer reviewed studies, that women who have an abortion are at greater risk for suicide ideation and suicide than women who carry their children to term. Today, the District Court made its own factual determination that it had no power to make on a Motion for Summary Judgment. Aside from the fact that the overwhelming majority of legitimate studies support the State required disclosures, the Court lacked the authority to overrule the State Legislature without a fact finding hearing.

We have every confidence that this error will be reversed on appeal.


Within the last 48 hours an audio tape has surfaced that reveals Planned Parenthood of Sioux Falls is in violation of this law, even after an 8th Circuit Court decision that said they must disclose to women that abortion terminates the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being. Click here to listen to this shocking audio tape and hear what really happens when a woman calls to schedule an abortion in Sioux Falls.
If you would like to show your support in the fight to help save the unborn lives of children and help protect women please consider a financial contribution by mail to the address below or by visiting our website


707 E. 41st St. #223, Sioux Falls, SD 57105

PO Box 461, Sioux Falls, SD 57101


No comments: