McRae v. Califano
| Decision Date | 15 January 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 76C1804,76C1805.,76C1804 |
| Citation | 491 F. Supp. 630 |
| Parties | Cora McRAE, Jane Doe, Mary Doe, Susan Roe, Ann Moe, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Planned Parenthood of New York City, Inc.; and Irwin B. Teran, M. D., Jane Hodgson, M. D., David B. Bingham, M. D., Hugh Savage, M. D., Edgar W. Jackson, Lewis H. Koplik, M. D., Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Women's Division of the Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church, Theressa Hoover, its Associate General Secretary, Ellen Kirby, its Executive Director, Plaintiffs, v. Joseph A. CALIFANO, Jr., Secretary, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Defendant, and Senators James L. Buckley and Jesse A. Helms, Congressman Henry J. Hyde, and Isabella M. Pernicone, Esq., Intervenor-Defendants. NEW YORK CITY HEALTH AND HOSPITALS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. Joseph A. CALIFANO, Jr., Secretary, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Rhonda Copelon and Nancy Stearns, Center for Constitutional Rights, New York City, Janet Benshoof and Judy Levin, American Civil Liberties Union, Sylvia A. Law, Jill Laurie Goodman, New York City, and Nadine Taub, Newark, N. J., for plaintiff women and medical doctors, and for Women's Division of the Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church.
Harriet F. Pilpel, New York City (Greenbaum, Wolff & Ernst, New York City, of counsel) and Eve W. Paul, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, New York City, for plaintiff Planned Parenthood of NYC, Inc.
Ellen Kramer Sawyer, New York City (Allen G. Schwartz, Corp. Counsel, City of New York, New York City, of counsel) for plaintiff New York City Health and Hospitals Corp.
Richard P. Caro, Asst. U. S. Atty., Brooklyn, N. Y. (Edward R. Korman, U. S. Atty., Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel) for the Secretary.
A. Lawrence Washburn, Jr., New York City (Bodell & MaGovern, P. C., Leonard F. Manning, Washington, D. C., Dennis J. Horan, Patrick A. Troeman, Dolores V. Horan, and John D. Gorby, Americans United for Life, Inc., Legal Defense Fund, Chicago, Ill., of counsel) for intervenor-defendant Pernicone.
Gerald E. Bodell, New York City (John D. Gorby, Thomas J. Marzen, Patrick A. Trueman, Americans United for Life, Inc., Chicago, Ill., of counsel) for intervenor-defendants Buckley, Helms and Hyde.
Margo K. Rogers and John E. Heintz, Washington, D. C. (Covington & Burling, Washington, D. C., of counsel) for American Academy of Child Psychiatry, amicus curiae, supporting plaintiffs' contentions.
Leo Pfeffer, Brooklyn, N. Y., for American Jewish Congress, American Ethical Union, American Humanist Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Board of Church and Society, United Methodist Church, Catholics for a Free Choice, Church of the Brethren, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ, Inc.), National Federation of Temple Sisterhoods, United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, Union of American Hebrew Congregations, Unitarian Universalist Women's Federation, United Church Board for Homeland Ministries and United Synagogue of America, amici curiae, supporting plaintiffs' contentions.
Robert A. Destro, Cleveland, Ohio, for Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights (and its members Michael J. Schwartz, Virginia C. Ryan, Kathleen C. Canepa, Ann Marie Segedy, Monte Harris Liebman and Bonnie J. Nitz), amici curiae, supporting the contentions of defendant and intervenor-defendants.
Anne R. Teicher, New York City, for Committee for Abortion Rights and against Sterilization Abuse, Committee to End Sterilization Abuse, and Comision Femenil Mexicana, amici curiae, supporting plaintiffs' contentions.
Edith Holleman, New York City (Phyllis N. Segal, New York City, of counsel) for NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, amicus curiae, supporting plaintiffs' contentions.
Following the decision of Beal v. Doe, 1977, 432 U.S. 438, 97 S.Ct. 2366, 53 L.Ed.2d 464; Maher v. Roe, 1977, 432 U.S. 464, 97 S.Ct. 2376, 53 L.Ed.2d 484, and Poelker v. Doe, 1977, 432 U.S. 519, 97 S.Ct. 2391, 53 L.Ed.2d 528, the decision in the present case preliminarily enjoining the enforcement of the so-called Hyde Amendment to the Act making Medicaid appropriations for fiscal 1977 (D.C., 421 F.Supp. 533) was vacated by the Supreme Court (433 U.S. 916, 97 S.Ct. 2993, 53 L.Ed.2d 1103) and the case was remanded "for further consideration in light of Maher v. Roe ... and Beal v. Doe". The Court denied plaintiffs' application for a stay of the execution of the order vacating the decision in this court, 434 U.S. 1301, and plaintiffs' petition for rehearing, 434 U.S. 881, 98 S.Ct. 244, 54 L.Ed.2d 165. A temporary restraining order entered in this court on July 28, 1977, was vacated on August 4, 1977.
The magnitude of abortion in contemporary societies appears, at least to an extent, from the published statistical data. The 1975 Abortion Surveillance Report of the Center for Disease Control ("CDC"), Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, supplemented by the prepublished tables for the 1976 Surveillance Report, analyzes the reported data on legal abortions...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jane L. v. Bangerter
...plaintiffs' argument in Harris was much more substantial than the evidence supporting plaintiffs' claim here. See McRae v. Califano, 491 F.Supp. 630, 702-15 (E.D.N.Y.1980); Jane L. II, 794 F.Supp. at Plaintiffs' allegations that the Utah Act violated the "primary effect" prong of the Lemon ......
-
Committee To Defend Reproductive Rights v. Myers
...this chapter, and to new and innovative approaches to the delivery of health care services."21 The trial court in McRae (McRae v. Califano (E.D.N.Y.1980) 491 F.Supp. 630) conducted a lengthy factual hearing with extensive medical evidence and concluded that the federal funding restrictions,......
-
Greenberg v. Bolger
...there may be strong policies against the use of appropriation riders to affect substantive rights, see McRae v. Califano, 491 F.Supp. 630, at 728 (E.D.N.Y.1980) (Dooling, J.); Democratic Study Committee, Special Report, The Appropriation Rider Controversy, 7-11 (February 14, 1978), the legi......
-
Moe v. Secretary of Administration and Finance
...Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare from discontinuing Federal reimbursement for medically necessary abortions. McRae v. Califano, 491 F.Supp. 630 (E.D.N.Y.1980). Since the First Circuit had already held the Doyle-Flynn Amendment to be in conflict with Title XIX, the order in McRae h......
-
MARY DOE EX REL. SATAN? PARODY, RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, & REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS.
...of their religious and conscientious scruples." Id. at * 160. (54) Id. at * 153. (55) Id. at * 152--53 (quoting McRae v. Califano, 491 F. Supp. 630, 742 (E.D.N.Y. (56) Id. (quoting United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 176 (1965)). (57) Id. at * 152-55 ("Pregnancy ineluctably requires imme......
-
MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF REGIONAL NEWS NETWORK IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR LIMITED INTERVENTION AND APPLICATION TO PROVIDE AUDIO-VISUAL COVERAGE OF TRIAL PROCEEDINGS.
...constitutional limits on legislation, and to interpret legislation. That is intrinsic to the separation of powers. McRae v. Califano, 491 F.Supp. 630, 731 (E.D.N.Y. 1980). See also Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 595 (1980) (stating that "judges bear responsibility for the vi......
-
THE STATE AS RIGHTS-FACILITATOR: RECONCILING BRANCHES OF PRIVACY DOCTRINE THROUGH CONSENT.
...(144) Id. at 474. (145) See, e.g., People v. Brown, 632 P.2d 1025 (Colo. 1981). See generally Subsection I.A.2. (146) McRae v. Califano, 491 F.Supp. 630 (E.D.N.Y. 1980), rev'd, Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (147) Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297, 300-301 (1980). (148) Compare Califano, 491 F.S......