AUSTIN, Texas (CN) - In a five-day trial that ended Wednesday, Texas health providers told a federal judge that a new law banning dilation and evacuation abortion is unconstitutional and part of the state’s plan to chip away at a woman’s right to choose by banning abortion one procedure at a time.
Senate Bill 8, a major victory for anti-abortion activists that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law on June 6, makes it illegal for physicians to perform a dilation and evacuation procedure without first causing “fetal demise” in utero, either by injecting a chemical compound or performing an umbilical cord transection.
The bill was supposed to go into effect Sept. 1, but U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel temporarily blocked its implementation when he granted the plaintiffs -- including Whole Woman’s Health and Planned Parenthood -- a restraining order in August.
Janet Crepps, an attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights and one of several attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the case, said during the bench trial that the bill would require women to undergo “invasive and unnecessary” medical procedures prior to having a second trimester abortion, making those abortions more dangerous and expensive.
“SB 8 will turn back the clock on advances in medical care that have made second trimester abortions both safe and accessible, forcing physicians to either stop providing D&Es or risk criminal prosecution,” Crepps said.
Attorneys for Texas told Judge Yeakel that the state has an interest in promoting respect for the “dignity” of the life of the unborn and that the law does not impose any significant health risks for women.
“It would be a dark irony, your honor, if the same constitution that required states … to provide a humane execution for those convicted of the most heinous crimes in our society, would be the same constitution that would bar the state of Texas from banning the living dismemberment of the unborn child,” First Assistant Attorney General Darren McCarty said.
Throughout the trial, state’s attorneys and their witnesses referred to D&E procedures as “dismemberment abortions,” a non-medical term that is also used in SB 8. The state shared with the court graphic descriptions and images of the procedure, including a picture of a tray of fetal remains, only discernable as such because of a visible hand.
During a D&E procedure, doctors dilate a woman’s cervix and use instruments such as forceps to grasp and evacuate the fetal tissue. The procedure, which is used beginning at 15 weeks of pregnancy, is the safest and most common method of second-trimester abortions.
“I would suggest the state of Texas’ interest in banning a living dismemberment from results like that is a sign of a progressive society,” McCarty said.
Crepps, however, said that the state had “no rational basis” on which to ban D&E procedures while suction aspiration abortion procedures, used during the first trimester of pregnancy, are unregulated.