By a 2-1 vote the legislative committee of the Bakersfield (CA) City Council yesterday decided to table indefinitely a hideously-written stealth anti-abortion ordinance after five versions and instead support a toothless city resolution praising abortion "alternatives." (Alternatives such as those offered by a husband-and-wife pair of local evangelists who specialize in harassing photographs of patients posted on their Facebook pages, and who both argued in person against such a resolution.)
It was at least a temporary defeat for the anti-abortion side and a face-saving measure for the council itself. There are already rumblings of recall efforts against one councilmember (probably futile ones, but still...)
Below the orange maluma are details.
The City of Bakersfield has been dealing with proposed anti-abortion ordinances written and supported by Tim & Terri Palmquist for 15 months now, and the City Attorney was clearly sick of dealing with the issue. The poorly-written ordinance (which was deliberately drafted so as not to include the word "abortion," something they apparently thought would score PR points) would allow individuals to sue in civil court anyone for "killing" a human being in exchange for "consideration." Presumably a rapist could sue a doctor if his victim were to obtain an abortion (or perhaps be given "Plan B," as loosely as the anti-choice side seems to define abortion). A good question would be whether it would allow relatives of police shooting victims to sue the city under the ordinance whether or not the shooting was ruled justified, or a relative to sue a doctor who followed a DNR code for a terminally-ill patient.
The ordinance went through five different versions, that is if you count the final one. It was submitted in a "highly unusual" fashion as part of public comment at a hearing on the previous four and was never provided for public scrutiny before yesterday's meeting to vote on it.
At one point, an exasperated City Attorney Virginia Gennaro, who had previously said that the proposed ordinance violated the US Constitution as interpreted in Roe v. Wade, the California State Constitution and the California Reproductive Privacy Act, was asked which version the committee was considering.
It didn't matter, she snapped, they were all unconstitutional and without legal grounds.
Instead they wound up recommending the kind of "commendation" resolution routinely approved by city councils, an action that could be taken up by the full City Council at their next October meeting.
For once a conservative city government had helped the pro-choice cause, in the sense that conservatives believe "nothing should ever be done for the first time."
One of the delays in the drawn-out process was waiting for submission of a similar ordinance adopted by another California city, preferably one of ten cities considered comparable to Bakersfield. None was ever submitted and the city clearly didn't care to break new ground.
The 2-1 decision to recommend a resolution rather than an ordinance--essentially a pat on the back to anti-abortion forces instead of the weapon they hoped for--came after a confused statement from one of their supporters, Councilwoman Jacqui Sullivan. She ultimately voted against recommending the resolution because she favored the ordinance instead--despite the warnings by the City Attorney that it opened the city up to liability.
(At one point she claimed that she'd bet "almost everything" she had that such an ordinance would never be challenged. No one followed up to suggest that she personally indemnify the city, however. She also stated that she'd previously believed in the pro-choice side--"America" and "freedom" and all that--but changed her mind.)
Most of the public testimony on the issue this time came from the anti-abortion side and was heavily laced with Bible quotes and religious references. Some speakers noted that the city had placed "In God We Trust" on the wall of the chamber (the result of a previous crusade by Councilmember Sullivan's nonprofit corporation years ago.) It was pointed out that nobody--so far--had challenged that addition.
It won't be the last we hear of the local anti-abortion squad, whose tactics include sitting outside the only local abortion provider (and Planned Parenthood, which doesn't perform abortions in the city) photographing those entering the clinic for public shaming on a Facebook page. But they clearly didn't get what they were praying for this time.