BILL McCOSHEN, SCOTT'S ROSS,
THANK YOU.
TURNING TO OUR ABORTION SERIES,
THE WISCONSIN LAWS RELATING TO
ABORTION ARE UNCONSTITUTIONALLY
VAGUE, ACCORDING TO THREE
PHYSICIAN INTERVENERS, NAMED IN
THE COMPLEX LAWSUIT CHALLENGING
WISCONSIN'S 1849 LAW ON
ABORTION.
THE LAWSUIT INITIALLY BROUGHT BY
STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL JOSH KAUL
LAST YEAR NAMES THREE DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS AS DEFENDANTS BECAUSE
THERE WERE PLANNED PARENTHOOD
CLINICS PERFORMING ABORTIONS IN
THEIR COUNTIES.
THEY ARE DANE COUNTY D.A. ISMAEL
OZANNE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY D.A.
JOHN CHISEL HOLY AND SHEBOYGAN
COUNTY JOE UMAR.
OF THE THREE, ONLY SHEBOYGAN
COUNTY YOU ARE MAN CAN I SAID HE
WOULD PROSECUTE PHYSICIANS IN
VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
THE LAWSUIT ALLEGES THE
PHYSICIANS FEAR CRIMINAL CHARGES
AND HAVE HAD TO ALTER HOW CARE
IS PROVIDED TO THEIR PATIENTS.
URMANSKI ARGUES THE LAWSUIT IS
AN ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN FROM THIS
COURT WHAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS
REFUSED TO DO AND ALSO SAYS,
ALTHOUGH THE INTERVENERS RAISED
CONCERNS REGARDING HOW THE 1849
LAW MAY APPLY TO ABORTIONS THEY
MAY NEED TO PERFORM AS PART OF
THEIR CARE OF PREGNANT PATIENTS,
THEY CAN NOT MEET NEAR BURDEN OF
DEMONSTRATING THAT THE 1849 LAW
CANNOT CONSTITUTIONALLY BE
APPLIED TO ANY ABORTION.
ONE COULD, FOR EXAMPLE, APPLY
THE 1849 LAW TO PROHIBIT AN
ELECTIVE ABORTION ON A HEALTHY
MOTHER OF A 6- TO 8-WEEK-OLD
UNBORN CHILD WITHOUT IMPLICATING
ANY OF THE INTERVENERS' CONCERNS
IN THEIR COMPLAINT.
NEITHER D.A. URMANSKI NOR HIS