This content was published in
November 19, 2024 – 04:44
Washington, Nov 18 (EFE).- A judge from the state of Wyoming, in the western United States, rejected this Monday two state laws against abortion that Republican Governor Mark Gordon had promoted, considering that they go against the constitution state.
Among them a rule that prohibited the use of the abortion pill and that was approved last year, making Wyoming the first state in the country without implementing such a rule against the most used abortion method in the country.
Judge Melissa Owens of the Teton County District Court wrote in her ruling that both the ban on medical abortion and the other rule, a broader ban against all methods of abortion, “impede the fundamental right to make decisions about abortion.” health care of a whole class of people, pregnant women.
“Abortion laws suspend a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions throughout the entire period of a pregnancy and are neither reasonable nor necessary to protect the general health and well-being of individuals,” he noted. the resolution, which may be appealed by the state.
The ruling marks another victory for abortion rights advocates after voters in seven states approved measures supporting abortion access in the Nov. 5 election.
A right that in the United States has been restricted in numerous states, after the Supreme Court, with a conservative majority, overturned in 2022 the Roe vs. Wade doctrine that protected it at the federal level.
Thirteen states have bans at all stages of pregnancy, with limited exceptions, and four have bans that go into effect around six weeks into pregnancy, when many women still don’t know they are pregnant.
The Wyoming laws, pushed by Governor Gordon in 2022 and 2023, were challenged by several doctors, patients and organizations, who argued, among other things, that they violated a 2012 state constitutional amendment that says Wyoming residents have the right to make your own health care decisions.
Lawyers for the state argued that health care under the amendment did not include abortion. Jay Jerde, special assistant attorney general for Wyoming, argued that although doctors and other health care providers must be involved in abortions, there were many cases in which abortion was not “medical care” because “it is not about restoring the body of the woman of pain, physical illness or disease.
Enforcement of the two abortion bans had been temporarily suspended by Judge Owens while the court case unfolded. EFE
pem/sbb
On providing better healthcare options and support systems for pregnant women. In your view, what alternatives to abortion could be promoted to support both mothers and unborn children in difficult situations?
Interview with Dr. Sarah Abortion Rights Advocate and Dr. John Anti-Abortion Advocate about Wyoming Judge Ruling Against Abortion Laws:
Dr. Sarah: Good morning, thank you for having me. Can you tell me your thoughts on the recent ruling by the Wyoming judge striking down two abortion laws? How do you see this impacting women’s healthcare in the state and beyond?
Dr. John: Abortion is not healthcare. It’s taking an innocent life, and I’m glad to see states like Wyoming are recognizing this. The ruling is merely a setback, but we will continue to fight for the unborn’s right to life. What about your opinion on the possible implications of the ruling for reproductive rights in other states?
Dr. Sarah: I think that this ruling is a victory for women’s rights and reproductive freedom. It’s clear that many states are trying to restrict access to abortion care, and this decision sends a strong message that those attempts are unconstitutional. Do you think that there should be any limits on abortion access, or do you believe it should be legal up until birth?
Dr. John: I believe that abortion should be illegal in all cases except to save the life of the mother. The unborn child deserves protection, no matter how far along they are in the pregnancy. Why do you think the ruling emphasizes the importance of a woman’s right to make her own healthcare decisions when it comes to abortion? Don’t you think there should be some regulations in place?
Dr. Sarah: Abortion is a complex and personal decision that should ultimately be left up to the pregnant person. It’s their body, their life, and their future they’re dealing with. Regulations can unintentionally harm low-income and marginalized communities who may face additional barriers to access. As an expert in obstetrics and gynecology, how do you respond to concerns about maternal health when discussing abortion with patients? Do you believe that abortion can ever be necessary to preserve a woman’s health?
Dr. John: Yes, abortion can be necessary to save a woman’s life in rare cases, but we also need to work
