Ashcroft defends call for abortion records - NYT News Service

[question everything]

(snip)

Ashcroft said the records would be essential to the Justice Department's courtroom defense of a new federal law banning what he called "the rather horrendous practice of partial-birth abortions."

A group of doctors is suing to overturn the law, which was passed by Congress last November. They maintain that they have performed medically necessary abortions that would now be banned.

(snip)

The Justice Department has subpoenaed at least six hospitals in New York City, Philadelphia, Chicago and Ann Arbor, Mich., to obtain medical histories for women who have had abortions performed in the last three years by the doctors now suing the government.

A federal judge in Chicago has already thrown out a subpoena against Northwestern University Medical Center because, he said, it was a "significant intrusion" on patient privacy, and hospital administrators in other cities are contesting the demand as well.

(snip)

This is the second time in a matter of days that the Justice Department has come under fire for what its critics regard as an overly aggressive use of federal subpoenas. Earlier this week, prosecutors in Iowa dropped subpoenas they had issued against Drake University and anti-war protesters for information about an anti-war forum held on campus in November.

Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/fri/news/news_1n13abort.html

[Mountainman]

1. Can you spell KGB?

Remember how repulsed we were when we read about these kinds of things going on in Communist Russia? Who would dream that those so opposed to that form of tyranny would adopt it for themselves to practice?

[tom_paine]

6. History says quite clearly that Tyrants share certain characteristics

No matter what ideology they use to justify their Tyranny.

So it is not surprising that the Busheviks look a lot like the Soviets they supposedly hated.

They are the EXACT same kind of people, with different rationales for their Totalitarianism.

[AZCat]

12. Is this a trick question?

K....G...uhh

Nope. :)

[Fovea]

2. Yes, these women must be terrorists

That's why we are using PATRIOT against them!
Just like those war protesters.

This jerk is a criminal, and needs to be in leavenworth.

[question everything]

5. Next he will go after any kind of abortion

then after miscarriage and then will collect all the tampons of women who miscarried without even knowing it. There is a very small percentage of intercourse that actually ends with pregnancy.

Will he ever go after the bed sheets from wet dreams?

[Jane Roe]

7. Ever heard the story of Chicken Little? n/t

[Skittles]

14. oh stop

you MUST see that such a blatant, DISGUSTING intrusion of privacy could lead to worse things.

[Jane Roe]

15. Roe v Wade marks a boundary.

Unless they overturn Roe v Wade, I have faith that this case will continue to set restrictive limits on the ways that abortion can be restricted and regulated.

If so many Democrats keep being so calloused about *all* abortion restrictions, then we may lose Roe v Wade and slide right into that imaginary world where our jails are filled with those who have committed spermicide.

However, if we work out well-intended and wise restrictions on abortion, balancing late term fetal interests and the interests of pregnant wome as R v W suggests, then I think we will keep our Roe v Wade and never encounter this parade of the horribles.

[Skittles]

16. UM

I believe that is what we have right now. What right wingers are trying to do is criminalize all abortions. Give them an inch and they will take a mile.

[Jane Roe]

21. Sometimes it is best to give an inch . . .

to keep from losing a mile.

Ultimately, the (football? war?) metaphor fails here, because the prohibition of third trimesters abortions by government is generally allowed by Roe v Wade. Therefore, making restrictions within this Roe v Wade framework should not be considered as giving up any Constitutional rights -- not even "one inch" -- because it is Roe v Wade that defines abortion rights in the first place. If you don't have blanket third trimester abortion rights under Roe v Wade, then you don't have blanket third trimester abortion rights period. Nuttin' to "lose."

Clarification: of course, the so-called PBA act from this summer prohibited third trimester (and perhaps other) abortions in a patently unConstitutional way by not recognizing health and life exceptions. As such, this statute needed to be opposed (I oppose it) and is in the process of being overturned. This bad statute is not in effect now. It is too bad that Democrats are not more involved in turning this bad statute into a good one, because this stubborn opposition enhances the risk that we will be perceived as unbalanced, unnuanced and kind of brutal and will eventually lose R v W altogether as a sort of punishment for our apparent inability to compromise in this particular area of Constitutionally-mandated balancing of state and individual interests.

[dax]

18. "Late term fetal interests? don't know what a late term procedure is?

With extremely rare exceptions, what they call a late term procedure is a tragic event when a fetus is not viable and to spare a woman who may die without the procedure in many cases, the trauma of birthing a child that will be born dead or irreparably deformed to die within hours or days, they end the suffering for everyone sooner. It should be private and a medical decision between the principles involved. THAT PROPAGANDA from the rtlifers is crap-just ask any doctor...or woman who has suffered so much

[Jane Roe]

19. Yes, the line between viability and non-viability

is very important to understand, recognize and fairly evaluate when regulating abortion in a Constitutional manner pursuant to Roe v Wade.

I hope nothing in my comments led you to believe that I missed this important piece of Roe v Wade.

If you are saying that the decision of whether a fetus is viable or not must be left up to the pregnant woman involved, then you have a problem with Roe v Wade. Perhaps, in your eyes, Roe v Wade is "rtl" "PROPAGANDA."

[aquart]

3. There is no defense.

His prime interest is medical matters.

He consistently interferes in the doctor/patient relationship.

I don't want him out. I want him in jail.

[central scrutinizer]

4. interesting discussion last night

I went to a local watering hole after work yesterday to quaff an IPA and watch a basketball game (I don't have cable) and the people at the bar where discussing this. They were surprisingly well-informed about the procedure (they knew it was only used in extreme cases and often the fetus was severly deformed or braindead or the mother's life was in danger) and called the Ashcroft thing a witch-hunt. I was quite pleased to not hear the usual fundie buzzwords and labels.

[DemoTex]

8. Violation of HIPAA?

I thought the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 protected the privacy of patient's health information.

[AZCat]

13. HIPAA is the reason one of the hospitals...

Northwestern (I think) rejected Ashcroft's request- and then he backed down. I think HIPAA will protect the hospitals in this case.

[PA Democrat]

9. Ashcroft believes in privacy for the chosen few

For example, he believes that records of background checks of individuals purchasing guns should be destroyed within 24 hours, to ensure privacy for the gun owner.

Gee wonder if his view has anything to do with all that NRA money he and his boss have accepted over the years?

[question everything]

17. And this is why we have to get rid of Bush regardless of the nominee

It is not only Bush. It is Ashcroft, and Cheney, and Wolfowitz and the next Supreme Court nominees.

This is why I cannot understand some who would not vote for Kerry, or Dean, or Lieberman or.... who would rather risk four more years of this gang but who would keep their virginity for the right candidate.

[0007]

22. Beyond steroids and abortions, John Ashcroft is fairly lame

as far as being an Attorney General.

Never forget Mr. Ashcroft trip to Russia to hold a Press Conference about how the Intelligent Department had arrested Jose Padilla from Chicago.

Was this an over-kill?

[Tuttle]

10. Does this mean Roy Black will release Rush's medical records?

Who is suspected of breaking the law here?

Tut-tut

[DoYouEverWonder]

20. While we're at it, can we have W's medical records too?

There are a lot of unanswered questions about his life, alcohol and drug abuse that we are very concerned about and I think the American public has a right to know whether or not their president is a drug addicted alcoholic.

[Bandit]

11. Wonder what rush has to say about this

Listening...... Listening...... Listening...... Rush where are you... Listening...... Listening....... Hmmmm no Rush, wonder why he hasn't jumped right in there defending this Administration on this matter.

[susu369]

23. "the rather horrendous practice" - asscroft

what a curious statement. I say, "Asscroft definitely practices horrendous policy."