Profound joy at the passage of anti-abortion legislation during the 2005 legislative special session in September quickly turned to dismay as first, the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri, and then the Circuit Court in Jackson County, Missouri, issued orders staying the effect of this legislation.

At issue is legislation passed by the General Assembly that created civil liability for persons who intentionally aid or assist a minor to obtain an abortion by evading Missouri’s parental consent law, and that section which requires doctors performing abortions to have clinical privileges (privileges to admit and treat patients) at a hospital within thirty miles of where the abortion is performed. Planned Parenthood and others challenged these new laws within hours of their signature by Governor Matt Blunt, claiming that the former law is unconstitutionally vague and that the latter law places an impermissible barrier on a woman’s “constitutional right” to an abortion.

“Unfortunately, Missouri families and children will not be protected by these laws while Planned Parenthood challenges this legislation,” stated Deacon Larry Weber, Executive Director of the Missouri Catholic Conference. “Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit could delay the protections of this legislation for months or even years.”

As the legislation was signed and took effect, it was obvious that it would result in positive changes. Hope Clinic for Women in Granite City, Illinois, the abortion clinic just across the Mississippi River from Missouri that openly advertised abortions for Missouri teenagers, changed its long standing policy to provide abortions to Missouri teens without parental knowledge or involvement. The Hope Clinic announced a new policy that pregnant teens from Missouri would no longer be able to obtain abortions at the clinic without being accompanied by at least one of the teen’s parents.

However, in striking down the provisions of the bill imposing liability for persons who intentionally assist a minor to evade Missouri’s parental consent law, U.S. District Judge Nanette Laughery ruled that the bill “threatens an immediate chilling effect on all abortion counseling within Missouri and nearby states,” stating that the language is too vague to know what actions could be targeted.

During testimony on the bill, representatives from Springfield Healthcare Center had stated that, since their abortion doctor did not have clinical privileges at an area hospital, the legislation would have prevented the clinic from performing abortions. Upon the signing of the legislation, Springfield Healthcare Center, the only abortion clinic located in the Springfield area and one of four clinics regularly providing abortions in Missouri, immediately stopped performing abortions at the clinic. In her order staying the effect of the legislation, Judge Laughrey stated that the bill threatened the ability of Springfield Healthcare Center to provide abortions, and eliminated the only option for abortions in southwest Missouri.

The legislation also contained a provision that prohibited employees or volunteers of abortion clinics, and anyone with a financial interest in the outcome of an abortion, from serving as a minor’s “next friend” to seek judicial consent to have an abortion, in the absence of parental consent. Since minors cannot petition courts in their own name in civil cases, Missouri law allows courts to appoint an adult as a “next friend” for minors in order to allow the minor to bring a lawsuit, including actions seeking judicial permission for abortions. Although this “judicial bypass” procedure is rarely used in Missouri courts, the amendment to these provisions protects against overreaching on the part of the abortion clinic. The amendment prohibits a father that might owe child support if the child were born, or an adult that might have sexually abused the pregnant girl from being appointed as a “next friend. This provision was not challenged by the lawsuit in either federal or state court.

The MCC continues to monitor the progress of these lawsuits, and to assist in the defense of these laws. “We hope that these legal maneuvers to delay the protections of pregnant teens and Missouri families are quickly resolved,” concluded Deacon Weber. “Missouri families and pregnant young women should note and be aware of the challenges to these laws, which are clearly designed to protect them from false promises and actions by the abortion industry.”