The “Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2011″

-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger

Jan Brewer

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has signed into law House Bill 2443, named the “Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2011.” I don’t think the name was intended to be humorous. The law makes it a Class 3 felony to:

PERFORM AN ABORTION KNOWING THAT THE ABORTION IS SOUGHT BASED ON THE SEX OR RACE OF THE CHILD OR THE RACE OF A PARENT OF THAT CHILD.

Is this really a problem in Arizona? Maybe in other countries, but in this country? Show me the evidence.

The woman is given a free pass even though it’s her evil discriminatory motives that are the point of the law:

A WOMAN ON WHOM A SEX-SELECTION OR RACE-SELECTION ABORTION IS PERFORMED IS NOT SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL CIVIL LIABILITY FOR ANY VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION OR FOR A CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE THIS SECTION.

This law seems problematic from an enforcement point of view. How does the doctor, who could be subjected to this law, know the woman’s motivation?

While other states are fighting budget crises, it’s nice to see that Arizona has the time and treasure to pass legislation for a problem that doesn’t actually exist. It’s also nice to see Arizona leading the nation in the area of anti-discrimination.

H/T: VC, Susan Nielsen.

21 Responses to “The “Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2011″”


  1. 1 Anonymously Yours 1, April 10, 2011 at 9:02 am

    This has racial under and overtones….Will it withstand even a Rational Basis standard…Abortion based on rape….of a white woman by a black male…. These are inconsistent in my mind:

    The law makes it a Class 3 felony to:

    PERFORM AN ABORTION KNOWING THAT THE ABORTION IS SOUGHT BASED ON THE SEX OR RACE OF THE CHILD OR THE RACE OF A PARENT OF THAT CHILD.

    Liability Created…..

    A WOMAN ON WHOM A SEX-SELECTION OR RACE-SELECTION ABORTION IS PERFORMED IS NOT SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL CIVIL LIABILITY FOR ANY VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION OR FOR A CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE THIS SECTION.

    It is my belief that this negates liability…

    Are these sections inconsistent..canceling each other…or does AZ really know what the hell it is doing…

  2. 2 puzzling 1, April 10, 2011 at 9:04 am

    So abortion is a protected right that you can’t legally exercise if you’re thinking about it a certain way?

    Why aren’t fetuses with Downs Syndrome or other abnormalities protected as well?

    If a doctor performs 60% of his procedures on female fetuses, would that be a crime? Will the state have the right to review ultrasound images and medical records to assure compliance?

  3. 3 Otteray Scribe 1, April 10, 2011 at 9:51 am

    AY sez: “Are these sections inconsistent..canceling each other…or does AZ really know what the hell it is doing…”

    *********************************

    I am pretty sure there is either a Monty Python or Keystone Kops skit addressing that issue, but I am too tired right now to find it. AZ know what it is doing? With regard to passing laws? AY, you just made me inhale my coffee.

  4. 4 Buddha Is Laughing 1, April 10, 2011 at 10:32 am

    Just when I thought I could not be surprised by the depths of human stupidity, here comes Jan Brewer. Governor’s race? This is the only race she is qualified to run in . . .

  5. 5 Woosty's still a Cat 1, April 10, 2011 at 10:37 am

    Inducing risk for doctors ….mmmmm….is this something the insurance lobby thought up?

  6. 6 Blouise 1, April 10, 2011 at 10:45 am

    Arizona has always … always been nuts.

  7. 7 anon nurse 1, April 10, 2011 at 10:50 am

    AY – OS – BIL,

    Great one-two punch, followed by the knockout… Very nice.

  8. 8 rcampbell 1, April 10, 2011 at 1:04 pm

    “….A PARENT OF THAT CHILD….”

    Abortions are not performed on children. They abort a fetus, not a child. Abortions are a legal medical procedure performed on women. This law illustrates one of the teabaggers’ big lies. It demonstrates how they see government NOT staying out of people’s lives. They want government out of their business lives and if there are any questions about how that turns out, just take another look at your Dec. ’08 401k statement. But your personal life—-they’re all over it.

  9. 9 JuDeB 1, April 10, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    Conservatives want to shrink the government. Now we know why…it has to be small enough to fit into a uterus.

  10. 10 Deborah 1, April 10, 2011 at 5:42 pm

    JuDeB:

    I always close my emails with a quote. I ‘d like to use your comment, if that would be OK with you.

    Conservatives want to shrink the government. Now we know why…it has to be small enough to fit into a uterus.

  11. 11 rafflaw 1, April 10, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    Well said rcampbell. This legislation is one more example of an out of control “government” in the State of Arizona.

  12. 12 JuDeB 1, April 10, 2011 at 9:10 pm

    Sure, Deborah, help yourself. A truthful comment has no copyright or owner!

  13. 13 pete 1, April 10, 2011 at 9:19 pm

    jan brewer knows this has been a problem because one of the people who got their head chopped off in the desert told her.

  14. 14 J. Brian Harris, Ph.D., P.E. 1, April 10, 2011 at 9:36 pm

    I disagree intensely about the Arizona state government being out of control.

    It is definitely in control, though in control of what bewilders me, and by whom it is in control is beyond my comprehension.

  15. 15 tomdarch 1, April 11, 2011 at 2:54 pm

    I hereby propose the following bill: “THE BECAUSE AL QAEDA IS PUTTING HALLUCINATION PILLS IN THE NESCAFE WE GET TO DO WHATEVER WE WANT FOR WHATEVER REASON ACT OF 2011″

    Whereas the al Qaeda terrorist organization has been identified as putting hallucination pills in coffee,

    We the conservative members of this (State, Federal) Legislature,

    Bound by our patriotic duty,

    Hereby are permitted to do whatever we deem necessary to improve or protect our (State, Nation),

    Without the quaint encumbrance of voting or judicial oversight.

  16. 16 Swarthmore mom 1, April 11, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/52941.html Ron Paul separates himself from libertarians with his strong anti-abortion message.

  17. 17 rafflaw 1, April 11, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Swarthmore,
    thanks for the link. Ron Paul is a fraud that keeps on giving. He is trying to outcrazy the Radical Right in order to enhance his “base” for his next run for the White House.

  18. 18 pete 1, April 11, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    i’m on my fourth jar of nescafe and still nothing.

  19. 19 Stamford Liberal 1, April 13, 2011 at 10:12 am

    Just when I didn’t think the Arizona government could get any crazier, they come out with this gem.

    Brewer & Co. are too stupid to get that we are not laughing WITH them, but AT them.


  1. 1 Republicans color the abortion debate Trackback on 1, December 6, 2011 at 11:29 pm
  2. 2 “Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2011″: Republicans Color The Abortion Debate « mykeystrokes.com Trackback on 1, December 8, 2011 at 10:41 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Turley Tweets

Click here to follow the blog on Twitter.

SELECTED AS TOP LEGAL OPINION BLOG (2011)

SELECTED AS TOP LEGAL THEORY AND LAW PROFESSOR BLOG (2008)

blawg100_2008_winner9349c7

Winner — Top Opinion Writer By Aspen Institute and The Week Magazine for Best Single-Issue Advocacy (Civil Liberties)

Categories

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,519 other followers

%d bloggers like this: