Federal law "provides that hospitals accepting federal funds may not discriminate against a physician because that physician has participated in or refused to participate in abortions," the state Justice Department said in its filing in federal court....There's a new Wisconsin law that requires doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital with 30 miles of their clinics. That law is being challenged in federal court, as an undue burden on abortion rights. And now the state law — oriented toward religious (and moral) objections to abortion — is having this side effect of burdening religious hospitals.
Seven doctors who provide abortions in the state lack privileges, and at least four are applying for them at religiously affiliated hospitals, according to their employer, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin.Is Planned Parenthood targeting the religious hospitals? Its lawyers observe that many Wisconsin hospitals have religious affiliations, so this is what they law has driven them into doing.
Note that Van Hollen isn't arguing that federal law requires that the abortions be performed in religious hospitals. It doesn't. He's only saying that the hospitals can't refuse admitting privileges to doctors on the ground that they perform abortions elsewhere.
IN THE COMMENTS: MayBee asks some key questions:
What are the admitting privileges for? To admit a patient in the midst of a botched abortion?
Will a hospital that does so be forced, then, to participate in an abortion? Can they ensure the baby will be saved if the mother is brought in during an abortion that is going wrong? Or will the doctor have the "right" to complete the abortion?