Supreme Court sends New Hampshire abortion notification law back for fix

As they await a lower court ruling, legislators say a broad health exception was not intended in the statute.

By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Feb. 6, 2006.

The U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing New Hampshire to mend its law that requires minors who are seeking abortions to notify parents has both sides of the debate claiming victory. Some doctors and abortion rights groups praised the ruling for protecting pregnant women's health, and other physicians and anti-abortion groups lauded its permission of parental notification.

In their unanimous Jan. 18 ruling, justices agreed that "it would be unconstitutional to apply the act in a manner that subjects minors to significant health risks." But they decided not to throw out the entire law.

"Invalidating the statute entirely is not always necessary or justified," wrote Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Instead, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston and instructed the lower court to determine the state Legislature's intent when it passed the law. The question is whether New Hampshire lawmakers would prefer no parental notification law or a law adapted to meet the high court's standard for protecting the health of pregnant minors in emergencies. The Court of Appeals had ruled the statute unconstitutional because it lacked a health exception.

By following the Supreme Court's recommendation, the appellate court "can craft a narrow injunction that would adequately address emergency cases, while allowing New Hampshire's Parental Notification Act to be effective," New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly A. Ayotte said.

Abortion-rights groups and many physicians praised the high court's ruling for guarding doctors' medical judgment and minors' safety in emergency situations.