Blog

AUL Celebrates Oklahoma Win Where AUL Model Legislation Strengthens Adult Involvement on Behalf of Vulnerable Girls

Tuesday, May 7th, 2013

WASHIINGTON, D.C. (5-7-13) - Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest commended the Oklahoma Senate for passing AUL model legislation designed to assist parents and guardians as young girls consider an abortion decision. “The lies of sex offenders and abusive adults cover up too many crimes against young girls in America today,” said Dr. Yoest. “Abortion should not be used by abusers to avoid detection.”

The Legislature approved the legislation by a vote of 41 to 5.  State Sen. Greg Treat carried Oklahoma House Bill 1361, sponsored by State Rep. Randy Grau, which passed the House in March by a vote of 81 to 13. The bill now heads to Governor Mary Fallin for her signature.

“This bill empowers parents and guardians to provide the protection from Big Abortion that girls deserve,” said Dr. Yoest. “Parents have a right to know of the dangers that abortion poses to their daughters.  This legislation will strengthen parental consent prior to an abortion to better ensure that minors are also protected from sexual predators.”

HB 1361 requires that a person consenting to a minor’s abortion provide a government-issued form of identification and written documentation that he or she is the lawful parent of the minor.  This provision will prevent abortion providers from sidestepping the law by claiming they were “duped” into accepting consent from abusers fraudulently representing themselves as the parents or legal guardians of minors.

The bill also requires a minor seeking a “judicial bypass” to file her petition in her home county.  This prevents abortion providers from coaching minors on how to “forum shop”—that is, find judges who are likely to grant bypass requests.  The bill also adds a detailed consent form to Oklahoma’s consent requirements to ensure that minors and their parents are aware of the potential physical and psychological risks that a minor may face when obtaining an abortion, before a parent consents to an abortion.

“This kind of commonsense legislation should earn wide-spread, bi-partisan support,” Dr. Yoest said, noting parental involvement laws boast a 71% nationwide approval rating.

For more information on AUL’s cutting-edge model legislation or to request a copy of AUL’s Defending Life, click here.

AUL Files Thirteenth Brief Supporting First Amendment Freedom of Conscience

Tuesday, May 7th, 2013

“Big Abortion and its political allies have moved from ‘choice’ to ‘coercion,’ punishing those who do not support their deadly agenda,” said AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (05-07-13) –Americans United for Life today filed its thirteenth amicus curiae brief in a legal challenge to Obamacare and in defense of freedom of conscience. In our brief filed in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, AUL argues that the Obama Administration’s “HHS Mandate”—which forces many employers to provide insurance coverage for life-ending drugs and devices without regard to the employers’ consciences or religious beliefs—violates the First Amendment freedom of conscience.

“Big Abortion and its political allies have moved from ‘choice’ to ‘coercion, punishing those who do not support their deadly agenda,” observed AUL President and CEO Charmaine Yoest. “The Obama Administration is using the implementation of the Affordable Care Act to force compliance with its radical, pro-abortion agenda. This is the liberty issue of our day, as American employers face threats of ruinous fines if they do not throw aside their beliefs in support of the abortion lobby.”

AUL’s brief was filed in Gilardi v. Sebelius, a case filed by the companies Fresh Unlimited, Inc. and Freshway Logistics, Inc., and their owners Francis Gilardi and Philip Gilardi. The Gilardis believe that actions intended to terminate innocent human life through abortion are in direct and serious violation of their faith, and they operate their businesses according to the values of their Catholic faith.

Previously, a federal district court in D.C. denied the Gilardis’ request for a preliminary injunction, which would have barred enforcement of the HHS Mandate against them and their businesses. The plaintiffs appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which subsequently enjoined enforcement of the mandate against the Gilardis while it considers this appeal.

AUL’s brief, available here, demonstrates that the life of a new human being begins at fertilization (conception), that “emergency contraception” has a post-fertilization effect that can prevent a new human being from implanting in the uterus, and that forcing employers to provide coverage for such drugs violates their constitutionally protected freedom of conscience.

The brief was filed on behalf of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, National Catholic Bioethics Center, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro Life Nurses.

For more information on life-affirming healthcare, visit AUL’s unique project, Real Healthcare Respects Life, click here.

The Legal Legacy of Dennis Horan, Esq. for Protecting Human Life—Chairman of the Board of Americans United for Life—on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of his death

Thursday, May 2nd, 2013

Between 1970 and his death on May 1, 1988, Dennis J. Horan had an enormous influence on the development of American law protecting human life.  Dennis had a significant impact on the development of the law protecting human life in several ways:

  • Influencing the abortion litigation leading up to Roe v. Wade, and educating leaders and organizations about the implications of those cases;
  • A leading role in Doe v. Scott, the Illinois abortion case that was eventually appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1971 and could have substituted for Roe v. Wade or Doe v. Bolton;
  • Spearheading a legal and constitutional response to the abortion decisions in Congress;
  • A prolific writer of influential books and articles on the legal and medical aspects of the protection of human life;
  • Leading roles in Illinois Right to Life and National Right to Life;
  • Chairman of the Board of Americans United for Life (1975-1988).

And these he pursued evenings and weekends, while his “day job” was tripling the size of the Chicago lawfirm of Hinshaw, Culbertson as managing partner in the 1980s.

The legal battle that resulted in Roe v. Wade effectively began in 1967.  Until then, virtually every state allowed abortion only to save the life of the mother. In four years, 1967-1970, 14 states legalized abortion to some degree.  The battle in the courts began in 1969.

I had only a partial appreciation for what Dennis accomplished until I began in 2009 to more intensely research my book, Abuse of Discretion: The Inside Story of Roe v. Wade (forthcoming from Encounter Books in September, 2013).  As I researched the five year background to Roe, and the abortion litigation in the federal courts that led up to Roe, I began to come across Dennis’ name here and there, and then more and more.

Dennis filed a critical brief with his law partner, Jerry Frazel, and Dolores Horan in the Supreme Court’s first abortion case, United States v. Vuitch, decided in 1971.  He then spearheaded the defense of the Doe v. Scott litigation in Illinois in 1970-1972, and he filed an extensive brief in the Supreme Court in Doe v. Bolton and Roe v. Wade in 1971.  He also argued before the Supreme Court in Diamond v. Charles in November 1985, one of the last abortion decisions before the Supreme Court began its three “retreats” from Roe v. Wade in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989), Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), and Gonzales v. Carhart (2007).

Among all the briefs that were filed in Roe and Doe, Dennis’ alone included significant medical data on the short-term and long-term risks to women from abortion.  Not much reliable data on abortion existed before 1973, but Dennis, collaborating with Dr. Thomas Hilgers, compiled an impressive collection.

In 1971-72, while litigating the cases, Dennis also co-edited Abortion and Social Justice, a unique book which assembled the most relevant historical, legal, sociological and medical data against the legalization of abortion.

During the litigation in Doe v. Scott, Dennis and his law partner, Jerry Frazel, addressed the legal and judicial developments at an important legal-medical conference on abortion at Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago on February 21, 1971.  Dennis warned of the potential legalization of abortion by the Court and its implications at that conference.

After Roe and Doe were decided in January 1973, Dennis became chairman of National Right to Life’s Legal Advisory Committee (LAC) in 1974, which drafted a human life amendment which was eventually introduced in Congress as S.J. Res. 11 in 1975.

Dennis testified before Congress in support of a constitutional amendment on abortion three times, on April 11, 1975, November 16, 1981 and March 7, 1983, before the drive for a constitutional amendment on abortion in Congress came to an end with a vote against the Hatch-Eagleton Amendment on June 28, 1983.

In the 1970s, Dennis was a lecturer in law and medicine at the University of Chicago, and throughout the 1970s and 1980s, Dennis was influential in the American Bar Association (ABA).

He was also an influential legal advisor on pro-life legal issues to the US Catholic Bishops throughout the 1970s and 1980s.

Dennis also believed that a legal defense fund, modeled on the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund, would be essential to litigate test cases in the courts on abortion to challenge the Supreme Court’s abortion doctrine.  He brought Americans United for Life (AUL) out to Chicago in 1975 and added a legal defense fund onto the educational arm of AUL.

Dennis fundamentally shaped prolife legislation and litigation in the 1970s, published numerous articles and gave numerous speeches educating influential audiences of the status of the law and the likely future direction of the law, and established Americans United for Life on a firmer footing. AUL will celebrate its 42d anniversary this year.

In March 1984, Dennis spearheaded a Chicago conference on overturning Roe v. Wade through the courts, which was published by Georgetown University Press in 1987 as Abortion and the Constitution: Overturning Roe v. Wade Through the Courts.  Nothing has been published since that has such a deep insight into abortion and constitutional litigation.

Throughout these years, Dennis published numerous legal articles on protecting human life in the law at all stages of human development, from conception to natural death.  Dennis’ CV in 1987 listed dozens of articles.

Dennis’ distinguishing characteristics were foresight, a breadth of vision, prolific speaking and publishing, understanding of fundamental principles and their implications, and discernment as to the direction of American law in litigation and legislation.  These virtues resulted in his broad and deep influence.  His insights have guided legal work for more than three decades and continue to inspire many.  He left us a legacy, and lived a life worth honoring.

Appendix: Selected Bibliography of Dennis Horan

Selected Books

Horan, Cunningham & Grant, eds., Abortion and the Constitution: Reversing Roe v. Wade Through the Courts (Georgetown University Press 1987)

Horan & Delahoyde, eds., Infanticide and the Handicapped Newborn (Brigham Young University Press 1982)

Horan & Mall, Death, eds., Dying & Euthanasia (University Publications of America 1977, 1980)

Hilgers, Horan & Mall, eds, New Perspectives on Human Abortion (University Publications of America 1981)

Hilgers & Horan, eds., Abortion & Social Justice (Sheed & Ward 1972)

Selected Articles (in reverse chronological order)

Sustaining Life or Prolonging Death:  (An Interprofessional Symposium sponsored by Interprofessional Cooperation Committee- IL State Bar Association; Hyatt Regency O’Hare, May 1988)

Horan, Forsythe & Grant, Two Ships Passing in the Night: An Interpretavist Review of the White-Stevens Colloquy on Roe v. Wade, 6 St. Louis. U. Pub. L. Rev. 229 (1987)

Horan, Failure to Feed: An Ethical and Legal Discussion, 2 Issues in Law & Med. 149 (1986)

Catholic Ethical Teaching and Public Policy:  How Do They Relate? -  53 Linacre Quarterly No. 4 (November 1986)

Dennis J. Horan, The Effect of the Human Life Amendment on Fertility Control, chapter 6 in James Bopp, Jr. ed., Restoring the Right to Life: The Human Life Amendment (1984)

Horan & Grant, The Legal Aspects of Withdrawing Nourishment, 5 J. Legal. Med. 595 (December 1984)

Horan, Human Life Federalism Amendment: Legal Aspects, 28 Cath. Law. 115 (1983)

Horan & Grant, Prolonging Life and Withdrawing Treatment: Legal Issues, 50 Linacre Quarterly 153 (May 1983)

Horan & Valentine, The Doctors’ Dilemma:  Euthanasia, Wrongful Life and the Handicapped Newborn, in Infanticide and the Handicapped Newborn (BYU Press 1982)

Dennis J. Horan & Thomas Marzen, Abortion Laws Will Bend Under New Medical, Social Pressures, 63 Hospital Progress 48 (December 1982)

Horan, The Hatch Human Life Amendment, 62 Hospital Progress 12 (December 1981)

Horan, Termination of Medical Treatment, 16 Forum ___ (Winter 1981) (a publication of Section of Tort and Insurance Practice, American Bar Association)

Horan, Dignity of Life Developments, 27 Cath. Law 239 (1981)

Horan & Marianne E. Guerrini, Developing Legal Trends in Psychiatric Malpractice, 9 J. Psychiatry & Law 65 (1981)

Horan & Marzen, The Supreme Court on Abortion Funding: The Second Time Around, 25 St. Louis U. L. J. 411 (1981)

Horan, Critical Abortion Litigation, 26 Cath. Law 198 (1980)

Horan, Definition of Death:  A Medical-Legal Consensus, 18 Trial 22 (Dec 1980)

Dennis J. Horan & Marianne E. Guerrini, The Order to Treat: Judicial Intervention in Benign Neglect of Defective Infants (1980)

Dennis J. Horan & Robert E. Nord, Application of Antitrust Law to the Health Care Delivery System, 9 Cumb L. Rev. 685 (1978)

Horan & Marzen, Death with Dignity and the Living Will: A Commentary on Legislative Developments, 5 J. Legis. 81 (1978)

Dennis J. Horan & Thomas J. Marzen, The Moral Interest of the State in Abortion Funding: A Comment on Beal, Maher & Poelker, 22 St. Louis U. L. J. 566 (1978)

Dennis J. Horan, Fetal Experimentation and Federal Regulation, 22

Villanova 325 (1976-77)

Dennis Horan, Viability, Values, and the Vast Cosmos, 22 Catholic Lawyer 1 (Winter 1976)

Dennis J. Horan, The Quinlan Case, Paper prepared for presentation to the Medicine and Law Committee of the American Bar Association (1976)

Dennis J. Horan, Authority for Medical Treatment: Consent, Chapter 7 in Medical Malpractice (Illinois Institute of Continuing Legal Education 1975)

Horan, The Human Life Amendment (1975) (unpublished speech)

Dennis J. Horan, Abortion and the Conscience clause: Current Status, 20 Catholic Lawyer 289 (1974-75)

Comment on Commonwealth v. Brunelle, in Child & Family Magazine, vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 189-91 (1970)

Video: Dr. Charmaine Yoest on FOX News

Wednesday, May 1st, 2013

Dr. Charmaine Yoest recently appeared on FOX News to discuss Kermit Gosnell and abortion clinic regulations.

AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest Says “Big Abortion Keeps Abortionists Like ‘House of Horrors’ Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Business by Fighting Commonsense Regulations”

Wednesday, May 1st, 2013

The consequences of ignoring the harm that can come from unregulated abortion clinics are appalling,” said AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest.  “Abortion clinics should be regulated like the medical facilities they claim to be, and be required to provide humane medical care to newly born children.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. (05-01-13) – Americans United for Life President and CEO, Charmaine Yoest, joined other pro-life leaders on Wednesday in a news event in front of a Washington, D.C. abortion clinic where Dr. Cesare Santangelo works.  Santangelo was shown, in undercover video tape released by Live Action this week, discussing allowing infants to die without medical aid if born alive during a late-term abortion procedure.

Dr. Yoest made the following statement:

Roe v. Wade did not give abortionists the right to abandon infants struggling for life just because they survived an abortion attempt.  The right to life is the basic foundation of any civil society.  Americans United for Life challenges Big Abortion to join us in working for legal protections for infants born alive during botched abortions and for clinic regulations protecting women and girls. This should be an area of bi-partisan agreement.

The Big Abortion industry and their allies argue that commonsense regulation of abortion will infringe on ‘access’ – My question to them is:  ’Access to what?’ Access to the ‘house of horrors’ run by Kermit Gosnell? Access to substandard conditions that would shut down any other medical facility? Access to STDs from filthy instruments, or fatal injuries and infection? Abortionists do not have a Constitutional right to injure and kill women and girls in filthy conditions sold as medical care.

“The consequences of ignoring the harm that can come from unregulated abortion clinics are obvious. Abortion clinics should be regulated like the medical facilities they claim to be, and be required to provide humane medical care to newly born children.”

Dr. Yoest joined Lila Rose, President and founder of the pro-life group, Live Action, along with Melissa Ohden, a survivor of a failed saline infusion abortion; Marjorie Dannenfelser, President and Chairman of the Board of the Susan B. Anthony List; Jill Stanek, prominent pro-life blogger; Kristan Hawkins, President of Students for Life, and others who joined together to protest the Washington, D.C. doctor’s acknowledgement of infanticide as a possibility when a child survives an abortion.

For more information on AUL’s clinic regulations, click here.

Video: Dr. Charmaine Yoest on PBS NewsHour

Tuesday, April 30th, 2013

On PBS NewsHour, Dr. Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, and Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro Choice America, discuss abortion and debate its move from federal courts to state governments. Dr. Yoest wrote an op-ed for PBS to accompany the segment.

AUL Applauds Florida Senate for Unanimous Vote to Protect Infants Born-Alive During Abortions

Tuesday, April 30th, 2013

“The ‘house of horrors’ abortion trial in Philadelphia illustrates why Florida’s efforts to abolish infanticide are so necessary,” said AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest. “Protecting infants born alive should be a
marker of a civilized country.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. (04-30-13) –Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest saluted the Florida Senate for unanimously passing legislation to protect infants born-alive following botched abortions. Earlier this month, Dr. Yoest testified in favor of the measure and observed that it provided Floridians with “real protections for children, alive and struggling for life, who deserve a chance.” She noted that Gov. Rick Scott is expected to sign the bill, which also passed the Florida House unanimously.

“Stories of children stabbed with scissors in Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s Philadelphia abortion clinic and the LiveAction videos released this week show that infanticide is an on-going problem in America abortion clinics today,” said Dr. Yoest. “We also call upon states to enact AUL’s model clinic regulations which require abortion clinics to abide by the same basic medical standards as demanded of other out-patient surgical facilities. Florida legislators are an example to the rest of the nation of courageous leadership on behalf of Life.”

The Florida bill requires that, if an infant is born alive after an attempted abortion, the child must be immediately transported to the nearest hospital and given appropriate medical treatment. A born-alive infant would be entitled to the same rights and privileges as any other infant following a natural birth.

Planned Parenthood initially opposed this bill and notoriously endorsed the possibility of infanticide, in testifying that the fate of a born-alive infant should be left up to the woman, her family, and the healthcare provider. Following the public and media outcry, Planned Parenthood rescinded their opposition.

“The recent statements by Planned Parenthood’s Florida lobbyist illustrate just how fragile even the most humane legal protections for young children really are in America,” said Dr. Yoest.

For more information on AUL’s “Let Them Live” campaign, click here.

Defending the Indefensible: Closing Arguments in the Gosnell Trial

Tuesday, April 30th, 2013

Jack McMahon, the defense attorney for Kermit Gosnell, is a friendly guy. Before the trial began, he chit-chatted with pro-lifers in the gallery. He couldn’t discuss the case, of course, but he shared funny stories and talked golf. He seemed like a nice man.

Only he knows his motives for taking this case. Maybe he’s in it for the money. Maybe he truly believes in Gosnell’s innocence. Or perhaps he felt that he could handle it emotionally, and therefore had an obligation to take the case. (If no attorney were willing to represent Gosnell, the court would have conscripted someone, to fulfill Gosnell’s right to counsel.)

For whatever reason, when the court session began, he proceeded to defend the indefensible.

At the core of his closing argument was the assertion that no babies were born alive; they were all injected with the lethal drug digoxin in utero. But this raises an obvious question: if the babies were dead, why would Gosnell’s employees “snip” their spinal cords?

McMahon’s answer was confused: “Maybe to end the pain, some remote pain left in there.” Apparently the jurors are supposed to believe that dead babies can feel pain.

And why, if the babies were born dead, did Gosnell’s co-conspirators plead guilty to murder? McMahon had an answer for that, too: they were terrified by the “tsunami” of public opinion against them. (How this tsunami comports with the media’s month-long absence from the trial remained unexplained.) He also accused the government of “manipulating” the jury and alleged that the case was an “elitist, racist prosecution.”

The commonwealth’s closing argument was thorough. Prosecutor Ed Cameron carefully reviewed the evidence presented by the fifty-four witnesses in the case.

Medical testimony showed that the newborn babies’ movements and whines were not “cadaver spasms,” but signs of life.

Eyewitness testimony showed that, contrary to the defense argument, Karnamaya Mongar’s death was not a freak accident. Her death could have been prevented if there were trained medical professionals at the scene and the clinic was well-maintained. Instead, she was cared for by a woman with an 8th-grade education, a woman with serious mental health problems, and a 15-year-old girl, in an unsanitary house of horrors.

Most important, the prosecution reviewed voluminous testimony showing that digoxin was not used, or was improperly used, as a matter of course. The four infant victims were born alive.

Americans United for Life is hopeful that justice will be done, and that this case will bring public attention to the need for born-alive infant protections and abortion clinic regulations. The profit-driven abortion industry cannot be trusted to police itself.

AUL Files Twelfth Brief Supporting First Amendment Freedom of Conscience

Tuesday, April 30th, 2013

In this brief, we are targeting the Achilles heel of Obamacare – using the law to compel compliance
with an abortion agenda is clearly unconstitutional
,”
said AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (04-30-13) – For the twelfth time, Americans United for Life has filed an amicus curiae brief in a legal challenge to Obamacare.  In a brief filed today in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals,AUL argues that the Obama Administration’s “HHS Mandate”—which forces many employers to provide insurance coverage for life-ending drugs and devices without regard to the employers’ consciences or religious beliefs—violates the First Amendment freedom of conscience.

“In this brief, we are targeting the Achilles heel of Obamacare—using the law to compel compliance with an abortion agenda is clearly unconstitutional,” said AUL President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest. “This is the liberty issue of our day. Americans should not be punished for refusing to provide insurance coverage for life-ending drugs and devices or be subjected to politically motivated threats to their businesses, careers, and ability to provide for their families.”

She continued: “AUL is representing conscientious, hard-working Americans and defending the freedom of conscience in our nation.  Forcing employers to choose between providing life-ending drugs or facing ruinous fines for noncompliance is illegal coercion and underscores that the Obama Administration will stop at nothing—even trampling the Constitution—to advance its pro-abortion agenda.”

AUL’s brief was filed in Legatus v. Sebelius, a legal challenge filed by a group of plaintiffs, including Legatus, a non-profit organization for Catholic business leaders, and Weingartz Supply Company, a family-owned company in Michigan which is operated according to the family’s devout Catholic beliefs, including the belief that “emergency contraception” and abortion involve the intentional destruction of innocent human life.

Previously, a federal district court in Michigan granted a preliminary injunction to Weingartz Supply Company, but denied a similar injunction to Legatus because that organization qualifies for the government’s alleged “safe harbor”—a one-year period of time that certain entities have been given to come into compliance with the HHS Mandate.  Legatus has appealed the denial of the injunction, while the government has appealed the preliminary injunction granted to Weingartz Supply Company.

AUL’s brief, available here, demonstrates that the life of a new human being begins at fertilization (conception), that “emergency contraception” has a post-fertilization effect that can prevent a new human being from implanting in the uterus, and that forcing employers to provide coverage for such drugs violates their constitutionally protected freedom of conscience.

The brief was filed on behalf of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, National Catholic Bioethics Center, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro Life Nurses.

For more information on life-affirming healthcare, visit AUL’s unique project, Real Healthcare Respects Life, here.

AUL asks “How Many Women Must Die before Abortion Clinics Are Subjected to Appropriate Regulation and Inspection?”

Thursday, April 25th, 2013

“The Gosnell trial highlights a travesty,” said AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest. “Today in America, veterinary clinics are better regulated than many of the nation’s abortion clinics.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. (04-25-13) – As the criminal case against notorious Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell heads toward closing arguments next week, the case for comprehensive and medically appropriate abortion clinic regulations has been made, noted Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest. “How many women, girls and infants must die before abortion clinics are appropriately regulated and inspected?”

“Today in America, veterinary clinics are better regulated than many of the nation’s abortion clinics, ” noted Dr. Yoest. “Sadly, Kermit Gosnell is not an aberration.  In the last three years, at least 15 states have launched investigations into abortion clinics and individual abortion providers for substandard care – care that in some cases has resulted in women’s deaths.”

She continued: “For more than a decade, Americans United for Life has led the nationwide effort to combat the reality of legalized ‘back-alley’ abortions, advocating for meaningful and comprehensive regulation and oversight of abortion clinics.  And legislators across the country are responding to AUL’s call to protect women from substandard abortion clinics and providers.  Over just the last three years, eight states have enacted new comprehensive abortion clinic regulations or made significant improvements to existing regulations.

“Commonsense regulations must be a national priority. Enacting medically appropriate and comprehensive abortion clinic regulations is a critical and sensible solution to the on-going problem of unsafe, legal ‘back-alley’ abortions, which is now better understood as a result of the horrific revelations in the Gosnell trial. These regulations are designed to safeguard against unsanitary conditions, inferior equipment, and the employment of unsuitable and untrained personnel.  They are also intended to put an end to substandard medical practices that injure and kill untold numbers of women each year.”

AUL has developed a unique expertise in the area of abortion clinic regulations. Drawing on our successful defense of Arizona’s 1999 abortion clinic regulation law, AUL has developed two pieces of model legislation requiring regular inspections of abortion clinics and strict adherence to medically appropriate standards of patient care:

  • The “Abortion Patients’ Enhanced Safety Act,” which mandates that abortion clinics meet the same patient care standards as facilities performing other outpatient surgeries.
  • The “Women’s Health Protection Act”, which mandates that abortion clinics meet minimum health and safety standards in a variety of areas including recordkeeping, staffing, sanitation, patient intake and testing, the abortion procedure itself, and post-operative care.

Following the testimony of a Florida Planned Parenthood lobbyist who recently appeared to support denying medical care to an infant who is born alive following an attempted abortion, AUL Action also launched the “Let Them Live” campaign, challenging Planned Parenthood to do more than disavow this shocking testimony. For more on AUL Action’s “Let Them Live” campaign, click here.