By
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court said yesterday it will not hear South Carolina abortion providers' complaint that they are subject to unconstitutional and medically pointless regulations.
The court, without comment, turned aside the claim by doctors that additional medical and safety rules imposed by the state are really just an attempt to undermine abortion rights.
The conservative-led court has a narrow majority in favor of the basic right to an abortion, but in recent years it has allowed some restrictions on access to the procedure.
Four South Carolina abortion doctors claimed the disputed rules "represent a concerted attempt to chip away at the right to abortion" and violate the Constitution's guarantee that everyone will be treated equally under the law.
The rules governing everything from bookkeeping to air flow in clinic offices treat early-term abortion differently from other similarly low-risk medical procedures, the doctors claimed. To comply, doctors would have to make expensive changes to their offices and procedures that would raise the cost of abortion significantly, the doctors said.
"Under the guise of promoting maternal health, these regulations actually threaten women's health by significantly hindering their access to safe, legal abortions," lawyers for the doctors wrote.
South Carolina authorities responded that the regulations are very similar to national standards for abortion practices, and that one of the clinics fighting the rules has already complied with most of them.
"This regulation does not look to strike at a woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion," lawyers for the state wrote. "Rather, these regulations look to protect the health of women who seek abortions."
The state cited several benefits to public health and safety from the regulations, including requirements to ensure that abortion providers are properly trained and their clinics properly equipped.
The rules also require women be tested for venereal diseases that might complicate abortions.
The dispute arose from a 1995 decision by the state Legislature to change the way abortion clinics were regulated. The change also affects medical offices that perform abortions in addition to unrelated services.
A state regulatory agency later issued a new, 27-page book of regulations, and the doctors sued to keep the rules from taking effect.
A lower court agreed with the doctors, but the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state last year. The doctors then appealed to the Supreme Court.
In 1992, the high court reaffirmed women's core right to end their pregnancies but let states raise new hurdles, such as 24-hour waiting periods.
In its last major abortion ruling, the court voted 5-4 last year to dramatically limit states' power to ban "partial-birth" abortions.
