|
home > legislation > 2003 legislative
report
ACLU of Utah Comments on HB 123 “Prohibition
of Public Funding for Abortion”
Health
and Human Services Committee
Utah State Capitol
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
February
12, 2003
RE: Illegality
of H.B. 123 Prohibition of Public Funding for Abortion
Dear Committee
Members,
The ACLU
of Utah would like to take this opportunity to inform you of at least
two cases within the jurisdiction of Utah holding that state governments
cannot prohibit public funding for abortions in cases where the state
receives Medicaid funding and the mother’s life is threatened
OR where the mother is the victim of rape or incest. H.B. 123 flies
in the face of the holdings in these cases and will be expeditiously
challenged in court.
In Hern v. Beye, 57 F.3d. 906 (10th Cir. 1995) the Court found an identical
statute to H.B. 123 violates the Title XIX of the Social Security Act
of 1965 in conjunction with the 1994 Hyde Amendment because the federal
regulations permit Medicaid funding, a jointly funded federal-state
program, for abortions if pregnancy results from rape or incest. The
statute prohibited public funding to “be used by the State of
Colorado, its agencies or political subdivisions to pay or otherwise
reimburse, either directly or indirectly, any person, agency or facility
for the performance of any induced abortion” except when the life
of the mother is threatened. The court found that states participating
in the Medicaid program may not arbitrarily deny or reduce the scope
of services to eligible recipients solely because of the diagnosis,
type of illness or their condition. The Court found that treating abortion
as medically necessary care under Title XIX, then denying treatment
by singling out one medical condition by restricting coverage to cases
where the woman’s life is at risk, violates Title XIX.
Similarly, in Utah Women’s Clinic v. Utah, 892 F. Supp. 1379 (D.Utah
1995), the Court relied on Hern to find that Utah’s abortion funding
statute contravenes federal Medicaid statutes by failing to provide
funding for abortions in cases of rape and incest. The Court found that
Utah CANNOT deny Medicaid funding for medically necessary abortions
to eligible women whose pregnancies were the result of rape or incest.
The Court held that “so long as Utah continues to accept federal
Medicaid funds, the Supremacy clause requires the state to participate
on the terms established by Congress,” in the Hyde Amendment and
Title XIX. Because those statutes allow funding for abortions in rape
and incest cases, the statute at issue violated the law. H.B. 123 is
similar in spirit and intent to statute permanently enjoined in this
case.
In conclusion, deliberating and passing H.B. 123 is futile. The bill
violates federal law and is in direct conflict with on point legal precedent
in Utah. If this bill is passed, it will be summarily challenged and
permanently enjoined. Therefore, we urge you to prevent expensive litigation
over this issue by immediately rejecting this bill.
Sincerely,
Janelle P. Eurick
Staff Attorney
|
|
|