* 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.”
