New York liberal organizations contest passage of pro-life laws in Oklahoma

The Center for Reproductive Rights has be a party to or supported at least seven court actions since 2010 to promote unrestricted abortion in Oklahoma.

In September, the center filed another lawsuit, this one against Senate Bill 642, which is scheduled to take effect November 1.

SB643, by Sen. Greg Treat, R-Oklahoma City, and Rep. Randy Grau, R-Oklahoma City, requires doctors to preserve fetal tissue on an abortion performed on a girl under age 14. The purpose of the bill is to help prosecute child sexual abusers by compelling abortionists to provide fetal tissue for DNA evidence.

The Center for Reproductive Rights, with headquarters in New York City and Washington, D.C.,  is an ultra-liberal, pro-abortion advocacy group that has targeted Oklahoma because of the pro-life stance of the Sooner State.

In 2015, Gov. Mary Fallin signed a bill that would increase the state’s mandatory waiting period from 24 to 72 hours for women who want an abortion. That law goes into effect Nov. 1. Northrup, who claims to be “pro-choice,” opposes the new law because the center opposes any delays when it comes to women killing their unborn babies.

Rep. Pam Peterson, R-Tulsa, was the author of the Oklahoma Unborn Child Protection Act. HB 1721 prohibits the attempt or performance of an abortion by dismemberment unless necessary to prevent a serious health risk to the mother. A physician accused of performing such an abortion may seek a hearing before the state medical board to review if the procedure was necessary to prevent a serious health risk, and only the physician will be held liable for the attempt or performance of the abortion.

Here are some examples of the out-of-state group supporting the overturning of laws in Oklahoma.

  • In November of 2014, the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Burns v. Cline (Terry Cline is Oklahoma Commissioner of Health) supported pro-abortion interests by blocking enforcement of two state laws.

One (SB184) would have required abortion clinics to have a doctor with hospital admitting privileges in the clinic. The other law (HB2684) placed limits on the “morning after” abortion medication. In Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice v. Cline, justices upheld a temporary injunction to halt enforcement of the law.

SB184 would have stopped long-time abortionist Larry A. Burns, D.O., who has killed unborn babies in their mothers’ wombs for 41 years, from conducting abortions in Oklahoma. Burns has been allowed to continue aborting unborn babies without hospital privileges until the case is resolved.

  • In August of 2013, the center filed a lawsuit against HB2226 by Rep. David Derby, R-Owasso, which required women to show identification to a pharmacist to get the “morning after” abortion pill.

The center sued on behalf of Jo Ann Mangili and her teenaged daughter. The legal argument was that the law violated Oklahoma’s “single-subject” rule on legislation.

The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a suit in October of 2011 that resulted in the Oklahoma Supreme Court blocking a similar law against medication abortions.

In 2012, Oklahoma County District Judge Donald Worthington ruled that the law was unconstitutional because he thought it was obviously aimed at stopping abortions. The Oklahoma Supreme Court upheld that decision. Its conclusion was that RU-486 or any other abortion-inducing drug was legal and that the district court was correct.

In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Oklahoma’s appeal of the overturning of that law.

Nancy Northrup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said of that decision, “This should send a strong message to politicians in Oklahoma and across the U.S. that women’s constitutional rights are not up for debate and cannot be legislated away.”

A law to force abortion clinics to show women an ultrasound of their unborn babies was also thrown out by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

  • In 2012, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that an initiative petition that declared an unborn child a person was “unconstitutional” and halted its circulation following a lawsuit by the Center for Reproductive Rights. The Oklahoma justices wrote that since the U.S. Supreme Court has legalized abortion in Oklahoma, Oklahomans cannot pass an amendment to the state constitution that might grant citizen rights to unborn babies.

According to the website, redstate.com, the Center for Reproductive Rights is a global organization that targets states like Oklahoma, Arkansas and Kansas to prevent restrictions on abortions.

In the past, the center has tried to get the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which bars federal tax dollars for abortions.

Redstate.com said the center took in almost $24 million in fiscal year 2014 and had $19 million in operating expenses. Some of that money comes from corporations like Pfizer (which manufactures abortifactients like Cytotec), Microsoft, Google, Apple, GE, DirecTV and ExxonMobil.

“This widespread corporate support should alarm conservatives because, unlike other pro-abortion actors, the Center for Reproductive Rights can’t mask its true intent behind the guise of ‘providing healthcare,’” redstate.com reported.