Speaking of abortion, HB 1217, South Dakota's latest step toward a de facto abortion ban, bubbled up into the news again yesterday. That Sioux Falls paper raised concerns about how no pregnancy help centers have registered with the state to lie to women and provide the new punitive counseling mandated by our small-government Republican state legislature and governor. Robin Marty contends that the lack of registrants suggests that even abortion foes recognize HB 1217 stands little chance of enactment, but journalist Bob Mercer notes that no centers can register until the law takes effect on July 1.
Still, the question of what happens if no pregnancy help centers (also known as crisis pregnancy centers) sign up to carry out this law, as well as Attorney General Marty Jackley's hesitance to answer that question, does get me wondering. What happens if no one provides the coercive counseling South Dakota has made a pre-requisite for abortion?
We seem to have discovered another aspect of the unchecked power HB 1217 grants to Leslee Unruh and other anti-abortion crusaders. I thought maybe PHCs/CPCs might want to stay off the registry to protect their own privacy. But they may be more motivated to stay off the registry to achieve their goal of a total abortion ban. Think of it: the law says you have to sit through a lecture before getting an abortion. If no one provides that lecture, you can't get the abortion. Leslee Unruh and friends can make abortion impossible in South Dakota simply by doing nothing. Brilliant!
Fortunately, HB 1217 seems to give me unchecked power as well. Suppose none of the existing pregnancy help centers register to provide the coercive counseling. Suppose that, in my continuing dedication to public service, I decide to fill that gap by declaring myself a pregnancy help center. The text of HB 1217 places just one requirement on me: that I submit an affidavit certifying certain statements. The law imposes no duties, liabilities, or state oversight on pregnancy health centers. I send one piece of paper to Secretary Hollingsworth, and the Madville Times is an official pregnancy help center.
Ladies, I won't be able to shorten the 72-hour waiting period. I won't be able to make it easier for you to find a doctor in South Dakota who will perform the abortion. But I will be able to keep your coerced counseling short and sweet. I may even be able to set up a mobile PHC and bring your "consultation" to you.
Let's hope Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and the courts will spare us that strange outcome. But if they don't, I stand ready to serve.
Is that a wise tactic, though? I would imagine there would be a pretty strong case against the new legislation if no CPCs signed up. If a person cannot legally complete a process to get to an activity, how can such a law stand?
If the state requires that, prior to getting a liver transplant, you visit a South-Dakota-certified liver transplant counsellor... and yet no counsellors exist, then how can that hold up to due process?
If ~no~ CPCs sign up, then wouldn't that create a mechanism to invalidate the law? If ~one~ signs up, then at least there's a mechanism to comply with the law, even if it's prohibitively expensive/difficult to do so.
That's a good point and worth arguing in court. The complete absence of registered CPCs could constitute an "undue burden"... but we can probably already win that argument against the state just on the 72-hour waiting period and the nature of the coercive "counseling" we are requiring. The unavailability of said counseling wouldn't be the state's fault: the state created no mechanism that prevents CPCs from registering. So could that argument factor into a judge's decision?
Corey, I'd be happy to help with your mobile pregnancy help center. Sign me up!
I just want to say that Marty Jackley is a stand up guy and a very impressive individual.
...then how about he stand up and answer this relatively important legal question?
Eve, thanks! Now all I need is a physician to sign on as medical director, and we're set.
Can a back cracker be your medical director?
The law requires of the CPC "That they have a medical director licensed by South Dakota to practice medicine or that they have a collaborative agreement with a physician licensed in South Dakota to practice medicine to whom women can be referred." Are chiropractors considered licensed to practice medicine?
No they do not . Kind of my point!
If I read the Bill correctly there is no enforcement if you didn't have a med director.
True, John! Is there any provision for the state to investigate the CPC's declarations? Nonetheless, I'd like to be able to fill out that affidavit as truthfully as possible, just on principle. Is there a doctor in the house?