Walker-McGill v. Stuart
Description: The American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood challenged The North Carolina Woman’s Right to Know Act, H.B. 854, in federal court. The law required abortionists to display an ultrasound image of a woman’s pre-born child to her prior to an abortion and also to offer the opportunity to hear the baby’s heartbeat so that the woman has full and complete information before surgery. The case was formerly known at various times as Stuart v. Camnitz, Stuart v. Loomis, and Stuart v. Huff.
Supreme Court allows ruling against common-sense NC ultrasound law to stand
Monday, Jun 15, 2015
The following quote may be attributed to Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Steven H. Aden regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Monday to leave undisturbed a lower court ruling in Walker-McGill v. Stuart that threw out the North Carolina Woman’s Right to Know Act (H.B. 854), which required abortionists to display an ultrasound image of a woman’s pre-born child to her prior to an abortion and also to offer the opportunity to hear the baby’s heartbeat so that the woman has full and complete information before surgery:“Abortionists should not be exempted from the standard that anyone performing risky surgery fully inform the patient of what the procedure is and what it does. We’re disappointed that the Supreme Court has decided not to review a decision that denies mothers this fully informed consent about human life in the womb and the methods abortionists use to end it. Contrary to the 4th Circuit’s decision, there is nothing ‘extreme’ about a measure that only seeks to require abortionists to employ technology they are already using for abortions. Abortionists simply don’t want to use it in a way that jeopardizes their profits and shows women the truth.”
Justice Antonin Scalia dissented from the decision not to take the case.
Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith.
# # # | Ref. 35865
Legal Documents
Additional legal documents and resources: (Jubilee Campaign)Stuart v. Huff
Motion to intervene: Stuart v. Huff
Appeal of intervention denial: Stuart v. Huff
District court opinion and order: Stuart v. Loomis
4th Circuit opinion: Stuart v. Camnitz