ACLJ: Supreme Court Should Uphold Parental Notification Law for Children Seeking Abortions.

WASHINGTON -- The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in the New Hampshire parental notification case, said today the high court has an important opportunity to protect children by upholding the constitutionality of a state law requiring parental notification before children can get an abortion. The ACLJ's brief supports New Hampshire's position - which is also supported by the federal government - that the parental notification law is needed to protect the health of children.

"Laws like this are extremely important for protecting vulnerable children against coercion, deception, and the damaging emotional and physical consequences of abortion," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, which litigates pro-life issues. "There is a troubling double standard in play here. Children in public school must get parental permission to receive medication - even an aspirin. It makes no sense to permit children to undergo a medical procedure like abortion without their parents being notified. To permit children to get abortions without parental notification is not only legally flawed, but bad public policy. This is an important opportunity for the high court to step in and protect the health and well being of our children."

The Supreme Court hears oral arguments tomorrow in the parental notification case.

At the same time, the high court hears arguments tomorrow in a nearly 20-year-old case involving the use of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute - a law designed to combat drug dealers and organized crime - against pro-life demonstrators. The ACLJ is Counsel of Record in that case and represents Operation Rescue.

In its friend-of-the-court brief in support of the New Hampshire law, the ACLJ contends the Supreme Court has never held that all laws regulating the provision of abortions must contain a "health" exception - as the federal appeals court concluded. In fact, the ACLJ brief highlights the fact that the high court has rejected "health" exceptions in the past in the area of abortion funding and parental involvement laws. The brief contends that to require a "health" exception for parental notification laws "would be to make a shambles of existing abortion regulations." Further the ACLJ brief cites specific Congressional testimony from women who received secret abortions as children and whose testimony dramatically demonstrates that parental notification laws are needed and would play a vital role in the health and safety of children who are considering abortions.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the ACLJ specializes in constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C. The ACLJ is online at www.aclj.org.