Court strikes down Va. late-term abortion ban

Legal News Center

A Virginia law banning a type of late-term abortion is still unconstitutional, even though a similar federal ban was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The 2-1 decision by a panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirms the same court's 2005 ruling striking down the law. The Supreme Court had ordered the appeals court to take another look at Virginia's statute after the ruling on the federal ban.

The appeals court cited a key difference between the federal and state bans on the procedure that abortion opponents call "partial-birth abortion." The federal law protects doctors who set out to perform a legal abortion that by accident becomes the banned procedure. The Virginia statute provides no such protection.

The state has two weeks to ask the full federal appeals court to review the ruling, or 90 days to appeal to the Supreme Court. The attorney general's office "is reviewing all possible courses of action," spokesman J. Tucker Martin said.

The state law is unconstitutional "because it imposes an undue burden on a woman's right to obtain an abortion," Judge M. Blane Michael wrote in the majority opinion, joined by Judge Diana Gribbon-Motz.

Related listings

  • High court is blocked from case over investments

    High court is blocked from case over investments

    Legal News Center 05/13/2008

    The Supreme Court tossed itself off a big case Monday.The court couldn't take up an apartheid dispute involving some of the nation's largest companies because too many of the justices had investments or other ties with those corporate giants.It appea...

  • Court weighs whether to restrict 'business method' patents

    Court weighs whether to restrict 'business method' patents

    Legal News Center 05/09/2008

    Is a baseball pitcher's method for throwing a curveball patentable? How about a chiropractor's techniques?A federal appeals court wrestled with those kinds of questions Thursday when it considered placing restrictions on patent protections for busine...

  • Court upholds sentence for Ala. police officer

    Court upholds sentence for Ala. police officer

    Legal News Center 05/06/2008

    [##_1L|1372947792.jpg|width="130" height="130" alt=""|_##]A federal appeals court has upheld the conviction and 10-month sentence of an Alabama police officer for lying about a prisoner injured during arrest. A federal judge sentenced Jason Hardy Hun...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read