{"id":38304,"date":"2022-07-18T18:18:52","date_gmt":"2022-07-18T22:18:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/?p=38304"},"modified":"2022-07-18T18:18:58","modified_gmt":"2022-07-18T22:18:58","slug":"the-latest-on-the-court-battle-over-georgias-abortion-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/?p=38304","title":{"rendered":"The latest on the court battle over Georgia’s abortion law"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Both sides in Georgia\u2019s abortion fight have laid out new legal arguments in the wake of last month\u2019s U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade<\/em> decision that legalized the procedure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case started when the General Assembly passed legislation in 2019 banning most abortions in Georgia after a fetal heartbeat could be detected \u2013 usually around six weeks of pregnancy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A U.S. District Court blocked the law from taking effect after a group of reproductive care providers \u2013 led by SisterSong \u2013 successfully sued in 2020.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The state of Georgia appealed the district court\u2019s decision to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Last fall, the appellate court put a decision on Georgia\u2019s law on hold until a definitive Supreme Court ruling on abortion.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

When the Supreme Court overturned Roe<\/a> v. Wade \u2013 stating that there is no constitutional right to abortion in America \u2013 the appellate court requested updated legal briefs from both sides in the Georgia case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a brief filed late last week, reproductive rights advocates who oppose the law appear to say they will no longer pursue a constitutional right to abortion as a legal path to block Georgia\u2019s abortion law. Instead, both sides\u2019 briefs focused on the broad definition of a \u201cperson\u201d found in Georgia\u2019s abortion law<\/a>.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Part of the Georgia abortion law redefines a \u201cnatural person\u201d to include \u201can unborn child,\u201d which is now emerging as a key legal debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The brief from SisterSong and other reproductive care providers in Georgia argues that the broad definition of a person found in the Georgia abortion law \u2013 read in concert with other parts of Georgia law \u2013 would result in a chilling effect on medical care for pregnant women in Georgia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They say the broad definition could even lead to prosecution of medical providers<\/a> for providing \u201ccritical medical care that pregnant patients need.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The chilling effect on physicians would cast a shadow over patients\u2019 care \u2013 specifically the \u201cfundamental right to procreate,\u201d argue the plaintiffs. That would infringe on people\u2019s right to make childbearing decisions.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cBy threatening reproductive health-care providers with criminal penalties for providing routine obstetrical and gynecological care, such as amniocentesis and miscarriage care, and thus chilling and delaying needed diagnostic and treatment \u2026 the Personhood Definition forces those who choose to procreate to incur needless medical risk,\u201d the plaintiffs said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In contrast, the state contends that the \u201cnatural person\u201d definition in the abortion law is not unconstitutionally vague.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The state also argues that even if the \u201cnatural person\u201d definition found in Georgia\u2019s abortion law is unconstitutionally vague, that would leave the rest of the Georgia abortion law intact.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n[mailerlite_form form_id=3]\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Both sides in Georgia\u2019s abortion fight have laid out new legal arguments in the wake of last month\u2019s U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized the procedure.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":37422,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"newspack_featured_image_position":"","newspack_post_subtitle":"","newspack_article_summary_title":"Overview:","newspack_article_summary":"","newspack_hide_updated_date":false,"newspack_show_updated_date":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[8507,8782,11805,11407],"class_list":["post-38304","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-abortion","tag-georgia","tag-heartbeat-law","tag-roe-v-wade","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38304","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=38304"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38304\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37422"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=38304"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=38304"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thegeorgiasun.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=38304"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}