The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) joined the dogpile of federal lawsuits against new Kansas pro-life laws today.
They filed suit to overturn and enjoin insurance mandate HB 2075, which– except in rare situations needed to prevent the mother’s death– would not pay for abortion without an individually-purchased insurance “rider.”
My right to travel freely does not force others to buy me a car, and my freedom of speech does not require others to buy me a computer, but the
ACLU claims the so-called right to abortion is constrained without other people paying for it.
This mandate prevents no abortions, just stops the forced subsidizing of abortion by enrollees in private insurance and in any future state health insurance exchanges created under Obamacare.
Yet the ACLU insists HB 2075 is another “impermissible” law “trying to make it more difficult for women to obtain abortion” which, by “[f]orcing women to pay out of pocket for abortion previously covered by their insurance plan…is no different than requiring women to pay a tax.”
This ACLU doesn’t care about the civil liberties of the unborn (particularly those diagnosed with a disability).
Their filing claims the law shows gender bias because abortion coverage is not protected the way prostate cancer coverage is. But that’s an old –and invalid–comparison. Though both deal with reproductive issues, the former involves one individual seeking treatment for a medical condition, while abortion always involves two separate human beings.
“Abortion is inherently different from other medical procedures because no other procedure involves the purposeful termination of a potential life,”ruled the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1980 Harris v McRae case.
Abortion is NOT ordinary healthcare, and the McRae ruling validated the Hyde amendment, holding that citizens‘ tax support of Medicaid should not hold them hostage to pay for abortion, except to save the mother’s life.
And the Court has repeatedly upheld the state’s interest in promoting childbirth, starting with their 1977 opinion in Maher v Roe that
the State “unquestionably” had a “strong and legitimate interest in encouraging normal childbirth,” that was “honored over the centuries.”…and that Roe “implies no limitation on the authority of a State to make a value judgment favoring childbirth over abortion.”
12 other states [AZ, FL, ID,IN, LA, MI, MO, NE, OK, TN, UT, VA] now bar abortion coverage in future Obamacare health exchanges. (corrected) In seven other states [ID, KY, MO, NE, ND, OK, WI] employers and employees have been freed from violating their consciences in order to provide, or obtain, health insurance.
In fact, Missouri’s private insurance law caused Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas City to cover significant areas of eastern Kansas under just such a mandate for 2 decades.
COST-SAVER, NOT HEALTH-SAVER
Pushing women into abortion is a cheap way out for insurers, who should be providing the proper medical care deserved for pregnancy complications despite the high cost.
Under Kansas law HB 2075, when a woman’s pregnancy complications actually threaten her life, and abortion will truly resolve the crisis, insurance coverage is required (which includes ectopic pregnancies).
This ACLU attack on yet another new and constitutionally-sound Kansas law is an attempt to test the resolve of legislators and the new Attorney General, Derek Schmidt.
Kansans for Life objects to this lawsuit and feels confident that our Attorney General’s legal team will provide as strong and vigorous a defense as has been provided in the Title X suit.