Edwards v. Beck
786 F.3d 1113
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Arkansas HBPA heartbeat act Ark. Code Ann. §§ 20-16-1301 to 1307 (2013) challenged on constitutionality.
- Act prohibits abortion after a heartbeat is detected; requires testing under §1303(a) and prohibits abortion with intent to terminate life after heartbeat at 12 weeks+ under §1304(a).
- Exceptions exist for maternal life, rape/incest, or medical emergency; requires informed heartbeat disclosures under §1303(d), (e).
- Two Arkansas physicians sued on behalf of themselves and patients; district court granted temporary injunction and later permanent injunction for §§1303(d)(3) and 1304; rest upheld as valid/severable.
- Plaintiffs relied on Dr. Cathey’s declaration asserting fetus at 12 weeks is not viable; the State offered no competing evidence.
- Court emphasizes viability standard’s evolving science and upholds district court’s summary judgment on pre-viability prohibitions, affirming the permanent injunction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the act bans pre-viability abortions under Casey/Gonzales. | Plaintiffs contend the ban after 12 weeks violates viability; record shows 12 weeks not viable. | State argues viability is flexible with advances in medicine; regulation may address fetal life. | Unconstitutional pre-viability ban; affirmed district court's injunction. |
| Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment given the record. | Plaintiffs rely on Cathey declaration establishing lack of viability at 12 weeks. | State asserts viable framework advances; material facts unresolved are not present. | Yes, summary judgment supported; remained injunction on 1303(d)(3) and 1304. |
Key Cases Cited
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (U.S. 1992) (viability/undue burden framework; limits on state interference before viability)
- Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (U.S. 2007) (adopts Casey principles; regulation allowed if not an undue burden)
- Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (U.S. 1989) (upholding state regulatory measures; related to testing/term)
- Planned Parenthood Minn., N.D., S.D. v. Rounds, 530 F.3d 724 (8th Cir. 2008) (regulatory information disclosure permissible as non-misleading)
- City of Akron v. Akron Ctr. for Reprod. Health, Inc., 462 U.S. 416 (U.S. 1983) (viability debate; legislature’s role in fact-finding)