On October 9, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request by abortion providers to re-hear arguments on crucial portions of HB2. The ruling brings some level of closure to the HB2 provisions regarding hospital admitting privileges and chemical abortions, although Big Abortion in Texas could still drag the case and its anti-Life agenda to the Supreme Court.
After the Fifth Circuit ruled in March that the admitting privileges and chemical abortion provisions of HB2 would remain intact, the abortion industry predictably appealed the provision. Desperate to reclaim its domain in the increasingly Pro-Life state of Texas, the abortionists and abortion mills banded together to ask the full court of the Fifth Circuit to re-hear arguments (called an en banc review). The Fifth Circuit flatly denied this request.
The provisions that were upheld are key in protecting women’s health in Texas. The requirement that abortionists maintain hospital admitting privileges near their abortion mill ensures that, when they botch mothers’ abortions, the abortionists will be able to come with the women to the hospital to explain to staff there the circumstances of how things went awry. This requirement prevents women from having to undergo dangerous exploratory surgeries, such as the one that Texas abortionist Douglas Karpen’s victim Melanie Mendoza endured after he botched her abortion to such a degree that she is now infertile.
The provisions related to chemical abortions (abortions induced by drugs that are ingested by the mother) ensure that women receive the drugs in person from an abortionist, as is FDA protocol. Formerly, clinics practiced “telemed” abortions, for which the abortionists were not even present at the time the drug was administered. The women undergoing this type of dangerous abortion process were not even receiving the same amount of medical observation as women seeking low-dose hormonal birth control pills. In its ruling, the Fifth Circuit ensured that this provision of HB2 remained in full effect.