Gonzales v. Carhart: Amicus brief of the California Medical Association


Primary Content

Nebraska - 2006

The California Medical Association (“CMA”) – California’s largest medical association with more than 30,000 members – exists to promote the science and art of medicine, the care and well-being of patients, the protection of public health, and the betterment of the medical profession. CMA opposes the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003” (“PABA” or the “Act”), which lacks foundation in medical science, endangers the health of women throughout California, disrupts the physician-patient relationship, and makes criminals of highly trained physicians when they perform the safest and most common procedures available for second-trimester abortions.

CMA filed an amicus brief (with others) in the Ninth Circuit urging that the Act be declared unconstitutional. That brief argued that the Act is an unwarranted intrusion on the doctor-patient relationship, that it prevents physicians from carrying out their duty to protect the health and lives of their patients, and that the Act’s requirements are unconstitutionally vague and therefore they unduly burden protected reproductive choice. CMA agrees with the briefs to be filed by respondents in this case and in the related case of Gonzales v. Carhart, No. 05-380, and by the amici supporting them, that the Act is unconstitutional for all the reasons urged by CMA in the court of appeals.