HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » On Eve of SCOTUS Abortion...

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 11:15 AM

 

On Eve of SCOTUS Abortion Decision, Texas Accused of Suppressing Key Data



The Supreme Court is expected on Monday to announce its decision on Texas' abortion law, in what could be the most consequential ruling on the issue in a generation. The question: Do new requirements on abortion providers pose an unconstitutional "undue burden" on Texas women?

But among the reams of evidence presented to the high court and the public debate in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, something is still missing: A full, official account of the initial impact of the law on Texas women.

A state employee with knowledge of the annual data Texas collects on abortion spoke to NBC News and is accusing state officials overseeing the Department of Health Services of intentionally blocking the information and instructing staff members to mislead people who ask for it. Because fact-finding traditionally ends after such a case goes to trial, long before it reaches the Supreme Court, the justices may or may not have considered it. But in the court of public opinion, the data could potentially undermine Texas' official argument that its requirements pose no particular burden on women.

First catapulted to the national stage by then-state Sen. Wendy Davis' pink-sneakered filibuster, the law has a bundle of abortion restrictions. Local abortion clinics have asked the Supreme Court to block two of the rules: that doctors performing abortions have admitting privileges at local hospitals and that even early procedures, including "medication abortions" that involve only taking two pills, take place in expensive ambulatory surgical centers.

Saying they are unable to comply with the admitting privileges provision in one border town, McAllen, no hospital would even send abortion providers an application about half of the clinics in Texas have already closed since 2013. If the Supreme Court allows the other requirement to go into effect, only nine or 10 clinics will be left in a state with 5.4 million women of reproductive age. '

<snip>

read:http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/eve-supreme-court-abortion-decision-texas-accused-suppressing-key-data-n598071

I urge you to read the whole story. The details are damning.

58 replies, 4951 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 58 replies Author Time Post
Reply On Eve of SCOTUS Abortion Decision, Texas Accused of Suppressing Key Data (Original post)
cali Jun 2016 OP
cali Jun 2016 #1
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #9
cali Jun 2016 #2
Aerows Jun 2016 #3
katmondoo Jun 2016 #5
Ilsa Jun 2016 #10
Aerows Jun 2016 #11
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #37
alfredo Jun 2016 #30
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #8
cali Jun 2016 #12
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #14
smirkymonkey Jun 2016 #22
cali Jun 2016 #23
Silver_Witch Jun 2016 #41
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #44
trumad Jun 2016 #35
Ilsa Jun 2016 #13
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #15
justiceischeap Jun 2016 #36
lark Jun 2016 #18
MyOwnPeace Jun 2016 #24
passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #21
alfredo Jun 2016 #31
Crash2Parties Jun 2016 #29
BlueCollar Jun 2016 #32
no_hypocrisy Jun 2016 #4
herding cats Jun 2016 #6
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #45
spanone Jun 2016 #7
SunSeeker Jun 2016 #16
Fla Dem Jun 2016 #17
cali Jun 2016 #20
liberalla Jun 2016 #28
awoke_in_2003 Jun 2016 #25
Silver_Witch Jun 2016 #42
LineLineLineLineReply ^
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #47
awoke_in_2003 Jun 2016 #48
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #49
awoke_in_2003 Jun 2016 #52
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #53
awoke_in_2003 Jun 2016 #54
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #55
awoke_in_2003 Jun 2016 #56
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #57
awoke_in_2003 Jun 2016 #58
mcar Jun 2016 #19
csziggy Jun 2016 #26
Meldread Jun 2016 #27
LittleGirl Jun 2016 #33
Ford_Prefect Jun 2016 #34
mopinko Jun 2016 #38
alfredo Jun 2016 #39
BlueCollar Jun 2016 #40
kag Jun 2016 #43
niyad Jun 2016 #46
LineLineNew Reply ^
BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2016 #50
niyad Jun 2016 #51

Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 11:28 AM

1. More from the article.

 

<snip>

"The data is not final. If the data were final, we would release it. We hope to have it finalized soon," said Carrie Williams, a spokeswoman for the department.

But according to the state employee, who provided emails and screenshots to NBC News that appear to corroborate the timeline, the abortion statistics were in the final stages months ago. In fact, according to this individual, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of ongoing employment there, in December 2015, researchers in the relevant department were actually told to get the information ready sooner than the usual 15 months.

<snip>


In a June 15 letter, the ACLU of Texas, which first referred the state employee to NBC News, wrote, "Rather than responding honestly and claiming a legal basis for withholding the 2014 statistical tables, it appears that your agency has chosen to hide the truth." The letter continued, referring to Texas' state public records law, "Lying in response to Public Information Act requests would subvert the purpose of the Act, whether or not there is an arguable legal basis for withholding information."

Asked to respond to these allegations in detail, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of State Health Services wrote in an email in part, "The 2014 tables are under review, and we hope to have them finalized and released soon. For the last several years, Texas abortion data was typically finalized and published between March and June."

Minutes later, when NBC News followed up specifically to repeat claims that the data release was being intentionally delayed and employees were told to pretend they were not yet ready, the only answer was an out-of-office message.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #1)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:51 PM

9. SpokesLIAR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 11:48 AM

2. Abortion is an issue that no longer seems of important to DUers, if one goes

 

by response to threads about it.

This will be a momentous decision for women's rights- or further abrogating them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 11:56 AM

3. It is important to this DUer.

 

This is a horrible move for the health of Texas women and an erosion of the right to personal autonomy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:15 PM

5. I worried about the outcome before Scalia died

Now I don't know. Scalia was anti Abortion so I knew how he would vote. Worried again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:51 PM

10. And beyond personal autonomy, it affects women's economics.

There isn't enough assistance in Texas to help make up for the financial burden, including lost wages, career advancement, daycare, etc, when you aren't allowed to control how and when you reproduce. Having control of one's reproduction is one of the most important factors in managing personal finance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ilsa (Reply #10)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:51 PM

11. Precisely. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ilsa (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 08:44 AM

37. ^. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 09:27 PM

30. It is still important to me. The election is sucking all the air out of the room.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:50 PM

8. That's right. Seems DUers don't care about laws that target WOMEN for extreme suffering, even DEATH

for WOMEN. Only women.

But sure, let's post hundreds of thousands of protest threads against pizza and cake shops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #8)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:51 PM

12. yes, that passed my mind as I wrote that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #12)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:08 PM

14. Kick.

Ing. A lot of people in the ass.

I am so sick of the apathy towards what happens to women.

Oh wait, there were hundreds of thousands of posters concerned about women's rights---to show their t*ts.
Yes, if it's a critical human rights issue that may abrogate boob-showage, you can count on progressives to stand up for us!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 03:32 PM

22. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 03:35 PM

23. thank you, Blanche. You speak for me.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #14)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:10 AM

41. When did we loose our voice?

 

When did we not matter?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #41)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 10:40 AM

44. Hmmm...we haven't lost our pice...it just doesn't often get heard.

Well, we're changing that, I guess. It is changing. But so slow. Other issues usually grab attention first.

Funny how there are more posts to this thread arguing with other posters about focus of concern. If there's so much concern for women's lives, why did whoever not reply to the issue in the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #12)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 06:01 AM

35. Broad Brush bullshit.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #8)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:55 PM

13. Or getting called for using phrases similar to

"Family/religious rejection causing self-loathing".

Sometimes I think DU is only about one demographic at a time. Maybe this week will be "Women of reproductive age" demographics week.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ilsa (Reply #13)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:10 PM

15. Maybe I'm too jaded, but it seems the Woman demographic

Is always low on the human rights list around here...and everywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 06:38 AM

36. Yeah, sorry my gay rights got in the way of your abortion rights

As a woman, who also happens to be gay, both issues matter to me. But don't be pissed because people on DU started getting upset because the LGBTQ community was being blatantly discriminated against. It wasn't all that long ago that DU was blaming the LGBTQ community for election losses.

The reason people may not appear to be so vocal about women's rights is because they may not think they're really in danger of losing them --whereas the LGBTQ community was on the verge of getting them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:41 PM

18. This DU feminist cares a lot about women having the ability to control their reproduction.

That's one of many thousands of reasons I would never vote Repug.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lark (Reply #18)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 03:35 PM

24. And me, too!

So many issues, yet they are all important. Don't feel slighted because yours isn't pushed at any given time, just keep up the fight!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:56 PM

21. I think some people are just burned out with DU

The primary was so intense for so long and I think many of us need a break now. I hope that's all it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to passiveporcupine (Reply #21)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 09:34 PM

31. It has been a real distraction from important issues such as women's rights and the environment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 09:02 PM

29. It is important to some of us

Our family would be minus one mom and all our kids if not for a timely D&C years and years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 10:10 PM

32. For the record

It is important to this Texas DUer.

I give more money to Planned Parenthood and the Texas Freedom Network than I do to the National Party.

Hopefully SCOTUS will call out the Religious Right for what it is when they make their ruling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:01 PM

4. This Texas statute was the entire reason for Wendy Davis to make her famous filibuster and

to run for governor.

Even if the federal appellate decision is upheld by the USSC and its effect is limited to the jurisdiction of the federal circuit in which it's in, other states will be emboldened to pass their own statute in hopes of banning abortion without actually criminalizing the procedure.

I saw this coming this time of year in 1992 with the Webster decision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:23 PM

6. This is very interesting.

three data points are potentially relevant to the Supreme Court case. At oral argument, Justice Anthony Kennedy apparently referred to Grossman's data when he asked the Texas solicitor general about the finding that "this law has really increased the number of surgical procedures as opposed to medical procedures, and that this may not be medically wise."

A separate provision of the law, not before the court, specifically restricted the method Kennedy referred to as "medical procedures," or medication abortion. Women had to make up to four separate visits to a clinic, faced a smaller window of availability, and a higher, potentially riskier dosage of the pills involved. For women whose nearby clinics have closed, the additional visits in particular would have posed a potentially unconstitutional burden.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to herding cats (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 10:44 AM

45. Of course the gee oh pee lackeys are hiding and lying about data.

Glad this came out...luckily the last minute before it was too late. (If I understand correctly).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 12:45 PM

7. we are now understanding why there are only eight justices currently on the scotus

criminal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:19 PM

16. K & R for exposure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:29 PM

17. With only 8 SCJ's on the bench, Kennedy is the tipping vote.

Wed Mar 2, 2016
Key justice Kennedy wavers as Supreme Court confronts abortion
WASHINGTON | BY LAWRENCE HURLEY

>>>snip<<<

The outcome appeared to be in the hands of Kennedy, who often casts the deciding vote in close rulings. In past abortion cases, he has backed a fundamental right to abortion while supporting some restrictions.

The court was shorthanded with only eight justices following the Feb. 13 death of conservative Antonin Scalia, leaving the liberals and conservatives evenly divided.

The best that supporters of the law could hope for would be a 4-4 split that would let stand a lower-court ruling that affirmed the Texas regulations but set no nationwide legal precedent on whether other states could enact similar measures.

However, such a ruling leaving the Texas law intact could encourage other states with anti-abortion legislatures to pass similar laws.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-abortion-idUSKCN0W40BZ


Kennedy specifically asked for more data.

Kennedy at one point suggested sending the case back to a lower court to get further evidence on the law's impact, including an assessment of the ability of existing Texas clinics to meet the demand for abortions.


Even if Texas withheld data, not sure there is anything that can be done, The case has already been argued. Someone with more knowledge than me might know if additional information can be offered or is there anything like a mistrial at the Supreme Court level? Can the government ask for a do over because Texas withheld data?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #17)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:48 PM

20. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but I'm guessing that Kennedy

 

will be the vote that makes it 5-3.

As to your questions, I can only make a fairly uneducated guess that the decision has been made and will stand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #20)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 07:55 PM

28. God/dess I hope its 5-3!

No more/ENOUGH for these TX dickheads...
Just so sick of this shit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #17)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 06:13 PM

25. And senate democrats

 

have allowed the republicans to stop any potential replacements with only a whimper. They should be bringing up republican obstructionism every time a camera is in front of their face. If this ruling doesn't go our way, some of the blame gets dropped in Harry Reid's quisling lap

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #25)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:15 AM

42. Totally agree!

 

Very tired of dems not supporting women's rights! If people really don't want abortion they need to promote education and provide FREE bith control to everyone,man and woman, in this country!

Seriously ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #42)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 10:52 AM

47. ^

I think there would be more support of women's lives if media showed real consequences of forced birthing in women's lives. Social understandings are so very much shaped by media.

But because of deeply embedded taboos and deeply embedded romanticism regarding motherhood and children, people don't want to be confronted with realities.

And people who create media don't tend to think these difficult thoughts--if it doesn't affect them personally, or if acknowledgement could hurt revenue, the subject is effectively censored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #47)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 12:52 PM

48. I remember a time

 

when people were calling TV and idiot box. I always laughed at that. But thinking about it, the TV seems to have done just that- produce a lot of idiots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #48)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 08:50 PM

49. Ohhh, you MUST read "Amusing Ourselves to Death"

By Neil Postmann.

Seriously, it was ahead of its time. Predicted in the 70's exactly what's going on now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #49)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:04 PM

52. I will look that up

 

Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #52)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:10 PM

53. :)

If you can, tell me what you thought.

I read it quite a few years ago and it blew my socks off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #53)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:14 PM

54. I will try to sneak it in....

 

shouldn't be a problem, I am only reading The Count of Montecristo and The Poetry of Robert Frost right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #54)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 02:41 AM

55. Lol!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #55)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 11:50 AM

56. When I am in reading mode

 

I am usually juggling 4 or 5 at a time, so this is the perfect time to add another

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #56)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 12:09 PM

57. I do the same thing, only classic literature and poetry don't figure in,

Usually.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #57)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 06:34 PM

58. I just recently

 

decided to get into poetry to expand my horizons. I got some DH Lawrence, Dylan Thomas, and Robert Frost. I am on the lookout for Pablo Neruda. I have been meaning to read CoMC for ages, and am finally getting around to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 01:45 PM

19. Kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 06:23 PM

26. k&r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sun Jun 26, 2016, 06:45 PM

27. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 05:45 AM

33. I care

Which is one of the reasons why when my spouse was looking for a new job, I told him in no uncertain terms, don't even consider Texas or anywhere in the south for that matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 05:53 AM

34. FWIIW I think The Hype about Trump and Brexit took up much of the headlines here.

I think I saw 3 times as many Brexit headline remarks as those over Orlando. I don't know about the DU dynamics of interest vs. fear vs. those with agendas to drive or obscure discussion vs. the frequency of posting new items but I only saw this headline in the best threads listing, near the bottom of that list, 18 hours after it was posted.

Sunday is my slack day as far as controversy goes and I am getting quite tired of some of the side effects of the as yet unending Primary Season (up to 3 calls to Jury a day since the rule changes) which to say nothing of my own growing contempt for those who continue to insist on party purity without room for real discussion of issues such as this one.

I have watched the slow crawl from the shadows of the vile creatures who enabled the bill at the heart of this case. They have been emboldened for years by the promise of funds unending from the Kochs and others. They have been coached in the structure and the terms of this legislation by the same terrorist coordinators that have been stirring up hatred of LGBT people, Muslims and Liberal thought.

If we cannot have genuine national healthcare how can we set standards nationally for what is correct and unarguable about abortion and reproductive care? This case is an example of what happens when we do not. It seems to me that Congress is far too compromised to act appropriately. Likewise the DOJ has been far too distracted protecting investment bankers and looking for international terror to pursue the apparently more mundane domestic conspiracy of those who would disable Federal government and our access to its services and protections.

In this case women and children and families and men (well some of us at least) are victimized almost as severely as anyone murdered this year by those who claim they are somewhat closer to God. That the abusers find excuse for their fears and their actions in an excess of religious zeal says more than I can about their need to control what and who they cannot tolerate or manipulate.

How many headlines in the MSM has anyone seen about this SCOTUS decision?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 08:52 AM

38. kicking

never liked it that you can be a prolifer and still be a du'er.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:09 AM

39. We won 5-3

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:10 AM

40. 5-3

Texas loses...Women win

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 10:38 AM

43. Thanks for posting this...

and for recommending the rest of the article. It is fascinating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 10:49 AM

46. thank goodness SCOTUS acted correctly. and damn the woman-hating gestational slavers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to niyad (Reply #46)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 08:51 PM

50. ^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 08:52 PM

51. . . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread