In a 4-3 vote, Florida’s Constitution Revision Commission’s Declaration of Rights Committee agreed to a proposal that would say people have a right to be free from governmental intrusion “with respect to privacy of information and the disclosure thereof.” However, those words are misleading. The measure would lead to increased government intrusion, not reduce it.
Commission member John Stemberger, who is sponsoring the measure (Proposal 22), said the 10-word addition to the privacy clause is aimed at restoring the right to its original intent and to act as a correction to court decisions that have extended the clause to abortion cases.
“It’s about restraining the Florida Supreme Court’s gross overreach by ignoring the original intent of the amendment and in doing so producing bad public policy,” said Stemberger, who is from Orlando.
Those words are legislative double-talk for restricting one’s rights to privacy.
In this case, commission member John Stemberger wants to restrict privacy rights in cases of abortion. He said the amendment could lead to laws requiring parental consent before minors can have abortions and requiring 24-hour waiting periods before abortions, two measures that have been struck down by Florida courts based on the privacy clause.
Kimberly Scott, representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, asked the committee to reject the measure, saying it could have “dangerous implications for women’s health,” including imposing the 24-hour waiting period. “This specific clause has protected women from onerous and medically unnecessary restrictions intended to limit access to abortion services,” Scott said.
Details may be found in an article by Lloyd Dunkelberger of the News Service of Florida at: http://bit.ly/2FoageH.
Categories: Legal Affairs