Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
National Education Association of Rhode Island, et al.,plaintiffs, Appellees, v. J. Joseph Garrahy, et al., Defendants, Appellants
United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. - 779 F.2d 790
Argued Nov. 14, 1985.Decided Jan. 2, 1986
Richard B. Woolley, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., with whom Arlene Violet, Atty. Gen., Providence, R.I., was on brief for defendants, appellants.
Lynette Labinger with whom Roney & Labinger, Providence, R.I., was on brief for plaintiffs, appellees.
Marsha Levick, New York City, Sally F. Goldfarb, Emily J. Spitzer, New York City, on brief amici curiae for Now Legal Defense and Educ. Fund, American Jewish Congress, Equal Rights Advocates, Nat. Abortion Rights Action League, Nat. Women's Health Network, Northwest Women's Law Center, Women's Equity Action League, Women's Law Project and Women's Legal Defense Fund.
Before CAMPBELL, Chief Judge, BOWNES and TORRUELLA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The only issue raised by this appeal is whether two statutes enacted by the Rhode Island General Assembly, R.I.Gen.Laws 1956, Sec. 27-18-28, and R.I.Gen.Laws 1956, Sec. 36-12-2.1, restricting the availability of insurance coverage in that state for the performance of induced abortions, runs contrary to the precepts of Roe v. Wade, et al., 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973), and its progeny. The district court ruled that they did and issued a permanent declaratory judgment and injunction against their enforcement. See National Educ. Ass'n of R.I. v. Garrahy, 598 F.Supp. 1374 (D.R.I.1984). After careful consideration of the briefs and record and after hearing argument, we find we are in overall agreement with the conclusions reached by the district court. Without necessarily endorsing every particular therein, we affirm substantially for the same reasons provided by the lower court in its well-reasoned opinion.
Affirmed.