Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
By GINA HOLLAND
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that a lower court was wrong to strike down New Hampshire abortion restrictions, steering clear of a major ruling on whether such laws place an undue burden on women.
The opinion was written by retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a key swing voter at the court on abortion rights.
Justices said a lower court went too far by permanently blocking the law that requires a parent to be told before a daughter ends her pregnancy.
An appeals court must now reconsider the law, which requires that a parent be informed 48 hours before a minor child has an abortion but makes no exception for a medical emergency that threatens the youth's health.
In what may be O'Connor's last ruling of her career, she said "in this case, the courts below chose the most blunt remedy."
The court had been asked to consider whether the 2003 law put an "undue burden" on a woman in choosing to end a pregnancy. O'Connor is an architect of the undue burden standard, and was the deciding vote in the last abortion case five years ago, when the justices ruled that a Nebraska law banning a type of late-term abortion was too burdensome. That law did not have an exception to protect the mother's health.
Instead, justices did not deal directly with that question.
The opinion, just a brief 10 pages, was a victory for New Hampshire and had been closely watched by other states with restrictions. Justices had been told that 24 states mandate a parent's approval and 19, including New Hampshire, demand parental notice.
"In the case that is before us ... the lower courts need not have invalidated the law wholesale," O'Connor wrote. "Only a few applications of New Hampshire's parental notification statute would prevent a constitutional problem. So long as they are faithful to legislative intent, then, in this case, the lower courts can issue a declaratory judgment and an injunction prohibiting the statute's unconstitutional application."
(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
