* Always a good idea to pass an ordinance that your corporation counsel considers illegal…
Abortion has become a fiery topic for the City of Danville. On Tuesday night, Danville City Council voted to pass an ordinance that would prohibit the shipment of abortion pills, such as Mifepristone, to the city.
Council members voted 7 to 7 with Mayor Rickey Williams, Jr. casting the deciding vote in favor of the ordinance. […]
James Simon, Corporation Counsel, with the city’s legal division also says legally, it does not add up.
“I do not believe under Illinois law or federal law that this is ordinance is legal,” said Simon.
* WCIA…
OB/GYN Dr. Bethany Halloran described other uses for medications restricted by the ordinance, and said: “Put simply, it will unnecessarily endanger the lives of women and could very well lead to preventable death.”
The city’s Corporation Counsel James Simon called the ordinance “poorly written,” saying it would still interfere with the mailing of medications that could be used both for abortions and the treatment of other conditions. He also stated during the meeting he believes it is illegal under state law, namely the Reproductive Health Act and related provisions, and wouldn’t be protected by the federal Comstock Act if the city is sued.
Audience members who spoke in support of the ordinance cited religion, morals and feelings of guilt they say women can have after receiving an abortion as reasons they believe voting “yes” is the right thing to do.
* This was an odd amendment…
Before its passage at a lengthy meeting attended by hundreds, the council amended the ordinance so that it wouldn’t go into effect until the city “obtains a declaratory judgment from a court” that the ordinance can be enacted and enforced. All court appeals must also be exhausted before the measure can go into effect, city officials said.
Some aldermen seemed to believe adding this language might help protect the city from legal action. In a recent letter to city leaders, the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois threatened that passing the ordinance or attempting to enforce it “will do nothing other than expose the city to significant legal liability and fees.”
Shortly after the council approved the measure — even with the amendment — the ACLU of Illinois put out a statement calling it “an unlawful and unenforceable ordinance to limit access to abortion in the city.”
Full ACLU IL statement…
Earlier this evening, the Danville City Council after a long community discussion voted to approve an ordinance that would declare the community a “sanctuary city for the unborn” and attempts to place limits on abortion care in the community. The ordinance is illegal under Illinois law. The following can be attributed to Ameri Klafeta, director of the Women’s and Reproductive Rights Project Director at the ACLU of Illinois:
Today the Danville City Council adopted an unlawful and unenforceable ordinance to limit access to abortion in the city. Illinois has explicitly protected the right to abortion in this state, free from governmental interference, and Danville’s vote today is in clear violation of that law. We are evaluating next steps to challenge this unlawful ordinance.
* One of the chief architects of the Danville ordinance is Mark Lee Dickson, who founded the Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn initiative. More about Dickson…
Since 2019, Dickson and his partner, the former Texas solicitor general Jonathan F. Mitchell, have persuaded 65 cities and two counties to adopt the bans, almost entirely in sparsely populated rural areas. […]
In the past six months, the pair also have lobbied cities to adopt ordinances based on the 19th-century Comstock Act, which prohibits the shipment of “obscene” and “lewd” materials, including instruments, drugs and information related to abortion and contraception. While the law has not been enforced in decades, it remains on the books. […]
By and large, they also have not prevented people from getting abortions, said Andrea Miller, the president of the National Institute for Reproductive Health, an advocacy group. The existing ordinances collectively cover a population of fewer than 1 million people — mostly in states that already restrict abortion, or in rural communities that lack access to reproductive health clinics, she said.
That all changed with the Danville ordinance because it’s intended to stop a clinic from opening.
* Protesters on both sides gathered last night…
* Personal PAC CEO Sarah Garza Resnick…
The passage of this ordinance is an overt attempt to restrict the personal rights of residents of Danville and the surrounding region. It is also a blatant violation of the Illinois Constitution and the Illinois Reproductive Health Act, and will surely lead to legal action against the City of Danville. Danville voters should know that Mayor Williams and the seven members of City Council who cast aye votes on this ordinance will undoubtedly cost them untold taxpayer dollars in litigation fees when advocates to protect our rights inevitably file suit. The movement to protect reproductive rights isn’t backing down.
…Adding… Democratic Party of Illinois Chair Lisa Hernandez…
“I’m thankful for all of our partners at Personal PAC and the advocates at Planned Parenthood of Illinois and the ACLU of Illinois who work hard everyday to ensure reproductive freedoms are safe and secure in our state. While it’s become abundantly clear that women’s and reproductive rights will continue to face threats from the right as we navigate a post-Roe world, I am equally confident that these attempts to strip away civil liberties will never go unchallenged in Illinois. DPI will continue to defend our most fundamental freedoms against attacks from regressive politicians at every level of government,” said DPI Chair Lisa Hernandez. “People in every corner of Illinois, as well as those who come seeking refuge from retrograde laws in our neighboring states, must have access to abortion. I am deeply disappointed by the Danville City Council’s decision to strip away bodily autonomy from thousands of women in the area. This is an extreme overstep which prioritizes the Council’s personal beliefs over the wellbeing of the local community.”
- Dotnonymous - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 1:29 pm:
Dear God…save me from the, “feelings police”.
- IllinoisCitizen - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 1:36 pm:
I’m sorry. But if part of the law is to stop people about feeling “bad” after her decisions, you’re gonna need to ban confession, most drinking, and many peoples’ choices about their sex lives. This is just ridiculous.
- ArchPundit - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 1:40 pm:
It’s a lot easier just to give the ACLU or Personal PAC a donation instead of going through paying for lawyers and all.
- TheInvisibleMan - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 1:49 pm:
–Some aldermen seemed to believe adding this language might help protect the city from legal action.–
They pay an attorney who very clearly advised them otherwise. Which now makes me wonder if they will still be covered under their qualified immunity as a board member.
Amusingly, it would have to be this same corporate attorney who would have to be the one to file the summary judgement should any board members who previously ignored this same attorney, be personally sued.
Everything about this situation is broken. From the people involved in it, to the ‘reasoning’ used to justify it.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 1:50 pm:
I’ve got an idea. Let’s do something that’s completely illegal and unenforceable. I mean, isn’t that our role as government officials? Those that voted in favor of this lunacy should be removed from office for being ignorant.
- Dotnonymous - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 1:56 pm:
Qualified immunity needs to come to an end…for anyone…it’s a trick.
- We’ll See - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 2:11 pm:
Maybe the 7 Council members and the Mayor got a bunch of Facebook “likes” for voting in favor of the ordinance - and now you’re telling me that ain’t good enough, what’s happening to my country? /s
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 2:14 pm:
Keeping in mind the lowest passing score on the Bar exam makes one an attorney too.
It’s dangerous that Danville wants to control women’s bodies.
It’s bizarre how one thinks this is freedom too.
- Amalia - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 2:16 pm:
wait, let’s make a law that anticipates what a woman thinks. we’ll do the pre-thinking for her. we believe she will have regrets. Yes, about living in your town.
- TheInvisibleMan - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 2:20 pm:
–the lowest passing score on the Bar exam makes one an attorney too.–
Which makes it even funnier that these board members are probably going to be relying on this very same attorney to handle the civil lawsuits filed against them.
“oops, I’m just a dumb attorney who doesn’t know how to do my job. I missed the filing date for the summary judgement in the civil lawsuit against you, by 1 day. Good luck.”
- Appears - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 2:20 pm:
Once again, men are making the decision for women.
News flash, it is 2023. Women can make their own decisions. And maybe some of those decisions will be to run in the next election and replace those men who believe that they have to think for a woman.
- Dotnonymous - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 2:26 pm:
Danville-ians should be worrying about the next dust storm covering what’s left of them?
- btowntruth from forgottonia - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 2:59 pm:
I am dumbfounded.
How can anyone think that ordinance is a good idea and that it can stand up to a legal challenge?
- btowntruth from forgottonia - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 3:01 pm:
“My feelers is hurt and my pastor says it’s a good ordinance” should not be in play here.
- Henry Francis - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 3:28 pm:
What was once a “nation of laws” is becoming more of a nation of feelings, and those who cry the loudest make the rules.
- MisterJayEm - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 3:38 pm:
This is the natural consequence of a SCOTUS that will consider any foolish nonsense provided it is sufficiently right-wing.
– MrJM
- lowdrag - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 4:17 pm:
As a former citizen of “little chicago” this doesnt surprise me.
- Not a Superstar - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 4:24 pm:
Of course Jonathan Mitchell is at the center of this travesty.
- tallone - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 5:25 pm:
sounds like “let’s get some gynecologists to move their medical services out of town Bill” Thank goodness Danville is prospering and does not need them.
- Duck Duck Goose - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 7:06 pm:
Qualified immunity won’t apply because this won’t be a Bill of Rights case. It probably violates the dormant commerce clause and any number of federal regulatory statutes (and probably one or two state laws).
The dec. action provision is weird. Who’s the defendant?
- thoughts matter - Wednesday, May 3, 23 @ 8:32 pm:
Sure, let’s pass a law that violates state law. That will show we are competent. Save me from people who want less government unless their feelings are hurt. Then they want the government to stay out of their wallets but be in everyone else’s medical decisions. Hypocritical.