Court Opinion

ID: 9552109
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 19:04:52.550152+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:25:40.139786
License: Public Domain

KAUGER, Chief Justice,
concurring in result, with whom OPALA, J., joins:
The challengers/appellees have failed to present any credible evidence that requiring abortions to be performed in a hospital after the first trimester is cost prohibitive, causes an undue burden and amounts to “a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion” under Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.1 Without any evidence in the record before this Court, a determination that the statutes2 are invalid may not be based on speculation.3 Based on the facts — and the lack thereof — before us, I concur in the result of the majority’s opinion.

. 505 U.S. 833, 884, 112 S.Ct. 2791, 2824, 120 L.Ed.2d 674(1992).

. 63 O.S.1991 §§ 1-731 and 1-737.

. Mazurek v. Armstrong, — U.S. —, —-—, 117 S.Ct. 1865, 1867-68, 138 L.Ed.2d 162 (1997); Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 884-886, 901, 112 S.Ct. 2791, 2824-2825, 2832, 120 L.Ed.2d 674 (1992); A Woman's Choice-East Side Women's Clinic v. Newman, 904 F.Supp. 1434, 1448 (S.D.Ind.1995).