In a sweeping decision today, Judge Richard Williams struck down Virginia’s dangerous abortion ban, which had been blocked by the courts since July. The broadly worded ban – which is similar to the federal abortion ban being challenged in Nebraska, New York and California – contained no exception to protect women’s health. In addition, it subjected doctors to heavy fines and imprisonment for performing the safest second trimester abortion procedure, as well as treatment of miscarriages.

"This is an important victory for the women of Virginia," said Suzanne Novak, staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights and lead counsel on the case. "This dangerous law put women at risk by preventing physicians from performing the safest and most common second trimester abortion procedures with no exception for their patients’ health."

Under the ban, doctors faced a felony conviction for violating the law, with the threat of ten years imprisonment and a possible fine of up to $100,000. The Court held that the ban not only endangered women’s health, but "impermissibly required physicians to prioritize the ‘health and life’ of a pre-viable fetus ahead of the well-being of a woman seeking an abortion."

"Today’s decision should foreshadow the outcome of our challenge to the federal abortion ban," said Nancy Northup, President of the Center for Reproductive Rights. "Courts across the country – including the U.S. Supreme Court – have been clear that such bans are an unconstitutional threat to women’s health and lives."

The Center for Reproductive Rights is currently challenging the federal abortion ban in a Nebraska Court. Trial is set for March 29, 2004.

Just three years ago, in Stenberg v. Carhart, the Supreme Court struck down a similar Nebraska law banning so-called "partial-birth abortion." In that case, successfully argued by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Court struck down the Nebraska statute for failing to include a health exception and for banning a variety of procedures used as early as 12 weeks of pregnancy. A similar Virginia statute was also declared unconstitutional in 2000. As the Court held today, "the Act, like the previous statute, ‘constitutes an impermissible trade-off between women’s health and fetal survival’."

While anti-choice proponents of such laws continue to claim that they are bans on "late-term" abortions, the reality is that the Virginia law struck down today and similar laws make no distinction between pre-viability and post-viability abortion procedures. Moreover, post-viability abortions are already illegal in 41 states, including Virginia, unless the life or health of the pregnant woman is at serious risk.

Plaintiffs in Richmond Medical Center for Women v. David M. Hicks include a health clinic, a doctor, their staff and their patients. Suzanne Novak and Priscilla Smith of the Center for Reproductive Rights represents the plaintiffs along with attorney Susan A. Kessler, of the firm Blackburn, Conte, Schilling and Click, P.C. in Richmond.

To read the Judge's decision, click here.