AUSTIN, Texas – A federal judge on Monday upheld the Texas law requiring women to have a sonogram before having an abortion, saying an appeals court had forced him to declare the law constitutional.
District Judge Sam Sparks had previously struck down parts of the law, but his latest ruling said he's bound to follow the direction of the New Orleans-based appeals court.
A spokeswoman for the state Department of Health Services said the ruling clears the way for full-enforcement of the law, which was supposed to take effect Oct. 1 but has ping-ponged through the federal courts in legal challenges.
The agency posted guidance letters and information for doctors and patients on its website Monday. Spokeswoman Carrie Williams said officials would be checking to make sure abortion providers were following procedures during facility inspections.
The law requires doctors to show women images from sonograms, play fetal heartbeats aloud and describe the features of fetuses at least 24 hours before abortions. There are exceptions in cases of rape, incest, fetal deformity and for women who travel great distances to a doctor.
A group of doctors had sued to block the law, arguing it infringed on their First Amendment rights and is unconstitutionally vague regarding enforcement. The doctors claimed the law requires them to perform a procedure that is not medically necessary and that women may not want to have done.
Doctors who do not comply with the law could lose their medical license, be charged with a misdemeanor and face fines of up to $10,000.
In 2011, Sparks struck down provisions that requiring doctors to describe the images and others that required victims of sexual assault or incest to sign statements attesting to that fact. The judge said the state was trying to "permanently brand" those women.
The lawsuit bounced around federal courts in the last month.
First, a three judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Sparks' temporary ban. A few days later, the appeals court issued another opinion outlining why it considered the law constitutional.
More Here
