ACLU Letter to the Senate Urging Opposition of the Teen Endangerment Act (S. 403) (7/19/2006)
Oppose
the Teen Endangerment Act (S. 403)
Dear
Senator:
The ACLU strongly urges you to oppose the Teen
Endangerment Act (S. 403), called the “Child Custody Protection Act” by its
sponsors, when it is considered on the Senate floor tomorrow. The Teen Endangerment Act would make it
a federal crime for a person, other than a parent -- including a grandmother,
aunt, sibling, or clergy member -- to help a teen cross state lines for an
abortion unless the teen had already fulfilled the requirements of her home
state’s law restricting teens’ abortions.
It would deny teenagers facing unintended pregnancies the assistance of
trusted adults, endanger their health, and violate their constitutional
rights.
We all want teenagers to be safe.
The Teen Endangerment Amendment, however, will put our most vulnerable
teens at risk. This bill will not
create good family communication where it does not already exist. Even in the absence of any legal
requirement, most young women who are pregnant and seeking an abortion involve a
parent in their decision. For
those young women who choose not to involve their parents, many valid reasons
compel them not to do so. One
third of young women do not involve a parent because they fear family violence
(in many cases because it has already occurred), or are afraid of being forced
to leave home. Forcing a
young woman to notify her abusive parent of a pregnancy can have dangerous, and
even fatal, consequences for her and for other family
members.
The overwhelming majority of young women who obtain abortions involve an
adult (a parent, other family member, counselor, clergy member, teacher, or
adult friend) in their decision and are accompanied by someone to the
health-care facility. This bill, however, would discourage
young women who are already isolated and frightened from turning to someone they
trust. The bill would impose
federal criminal penalties on anyone other than a parent who helps a young woman
cross state lines to obtain an abortion if she has not first complied with her
home state’s teen abortion law.
Knowing that anyone who helps them obtain an out-of-state abortion would
risk arrest and imprisonment, many young women would be forced to travel alone
to seek care. In many cases, the
closest abortion provider is located across state lines. Yet the Teen Endangerment Act
criminalizes assisting teens no matter what the circumstances or reasons for
travel.
By closing outlets for teenagers facing an unwanted pregnancy, this
amendment would lead some to dangerous and desperate acts. A teenager facing an unwanted
pregnancy is already in crisis. If
she is unable or unwilling to consult her parents, her desperation is deepened
by her isolation. Teenagers in
these circumstances sometimes resort to self-induced abortion or illegal
abortion as a way out. These
efforts all too often have tragic results.
Finally, the Teen Endangerment Act raises serious constitutional
concerns. First, it conflicts with
core constitutional principles of federalism -- principles reaffirmed by the
Supreme Court in its landmark ruling Saenz v. Roe. The Constitution protects the
right of every individual to travel freely from state to state and, when
visiting another state, not to be treated as a foreigner. In violation of these essential
principles of federalism, this bill saddles a young woman with the laws of her
home state no matter where she travels in the nation. Second, the Teen Endangerment Act bill
lacks a constitutionally required health exception and contains an inadequate
life exception. The Supreme Court
has held
that any restriction on abortion, including laws restricting teenagers’ access
to abortion, must contain an exception to protect both the health and life of
the woman. In Planned Parenthood
v. Casey, the Supreme Court held that all abortion regulations must contain
a valid medical emergency exception, “for the essential holding of Roe forbids a
state from interfering with a woman’s choice to undergo an abortion procedure if
continuing her pregnancy would constitute a threat to her health.” Because this legislation contains
no health exception whatsoever and an impermissibly narrow life exception, it is
unconstitutional.
The Teen Endangerment Act will harm teenagers and do nothing to reduce
unintended pregnancies that lead to abortion. The best way to protect our teenagers is
to encourage families to communicate and to provide teenagers with the
information they need to prevent unintended pregnancies. Instead of supporting
legislation like the Teen Endangerment Act we should focus our efforts on
commonsense measures that will help to prevent unintended pregnancies.
*
*
*
The ACLU
urges you to oppose the Teen Endangerment Act Amendment.
Sincerely,
Caroline
Fredrickson Director, Washington
Legislative Office
Greg
Nojeim Associate Director and Chief
Legislative Counsel Washington
Legislative Office
|