(The Center Square) – The Kern County Superior Court has ruled against the Bakersfield Crisis Pregnancy Center’s claims that the Abortion Accessibility Act violates the California Constitution’s privacy and equal protection provisions.
The pregnancy center argued that the act only gives protections to those actively seeking to end their pregnancy and not those who suffer a miscarriage in addition to treating those who choose to continue their pregnancy. The Abortion Accessibility Act mandates coverage of abortion services without requiring copays, deductibles or any type of cost-sharing requirement and the court analyzed whether the non-inclusion of pregnant individuals carrying to term is violating the state’s constitution.
Attorney General Rob Bonta argued that without the Abortion Accessibility Act, those seeking an abortion may choose to continue the pregnancy due to the cost of the procedure. While the court disagreed with this, stating that continuing a pregnancy is more expensive than ending one, they did conclude that the Abortion Accessibility Act is a helpful service to pregnant individuals and provides services to roughly 97 women who would otherwise not receive a wanted abortion.
Additionally, the court stated that there are numerous other programs geared toward giving financial assistance to individuals who choose to carry their pregnancy to term.
“Pregnant women who choose to carry their pregnancy to term need different services for an extended period of time,” reads the court decision. “The cost of these services generally is substantially more than the cost of elective abortions. These services include medical and non-medical needs. The government provides assistance in many ways and through many different programs to these pregnant women.”
The ruling also notes that it makes sense for those who seek to end their pregnancy and those who want to continue it to have different programs as they require different services that have different costs associated with them; elective abortions cost approximately $543 and carrying a pregnancy to term costs about $2,854.
“Equal protection does not require identical treatment,” the ruling said.
The court also determined that the Abortion Accessibility Act does not discriminate against those who choose to end their pregnancy as the medical services performed are typically the same.
“The ability to access safe and timely abortion services without financial barriers is vital for those seeking abortion care,” Bonta said. “The Abortion Accessibility Act does just that by ensuring that personal medical decisions are left to individuals and their doctors, not dictated by financial constraints. We are pleased with the Court’s decision that ensures equitable access to abortion healthcare and upholds the dignity, autonomy, and well-being of Californians.”
