State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Missouri > T12 > C188 > 188_205

Use of public funds prohibited, when.

188.205. It shall be unlawful for any public funds to beexpended for the purpose of performing or assisting an abortion,not necessary to save the life of the mother, or for the purposeof encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion notnecessary to save her life.

(L. 1986 H.B. 1596 § 2)

(1987) United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri Central Division, on March 17, 1987, held that section 188.205 was unconstitutional and the state was permanently enjoined from enforcing this provision. Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 655 F.Supp. 1300 (W.D.Mo. 1987).

(1988) United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that Missouri's ban on expenditure of public funds for purpose of performing or assisting abortions is constitutional but the portion of the section which prohibits the use of public funds for encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion is void for vagueness. Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 851 F.2d 1071 (8th Cir. 1988).

(1989) Where state interpretation of statute was that it was not directed at primary conduct of physicians or health care providers but was simply instruction to state's fiscal officers not to allocate public funds for abortion counseling, state-employed health professionals and private nonprofit corporations providing abortion services were no longer adversely affected by section and there was no longer case or controversy before a court. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 109 S.Ct. 3040.

State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Missouri > T12 > C188 > 188_205

Use of public funds prohibited, when.

188.205. It shall be unlawful for any public funds to beexpended for the purpose of performing or assisting an abortion,not necessary to save the life of the mother, or for the purposeof encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion notnecessary to save her life.

(L. 1986 H.B. 1596 § 2)

(1987) United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri Central Division, on March 17, 1987, held that section 188.205 was unconstitutional and the state was permanently enjoined from enforcing this provision. Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 655 F.Supp. 1300 (W.D.Mo. 1987).

(1988) United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that Missouri's ban on expenditure of public funds for purpose of performing or assisting abortions is constitutional but the portion of the section which prohibits the use of public funds for encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion is void for vagueness. Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 851 F.2d 1071 (8th Cir. 1988).

(1989) Where state interpretation of statute was that it was not directed at primary conduct of physicians or health care providers but was simply instruction to state's fiscal officers not to allocate public funds for abortion counseling, state-employed health professionals and private nonprofit corporations providing abortion services were no longer adversely affected by section and there was no longer case or controversy before a court. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 109 S.Ct. 3040.


State Codes and Statutes

State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Missouri > T12 > C188 > 188_205

Use of public funds prohibited, when.

188.205. It shall be unlawful for any public funds to beexpended for the purpose of performing or assisting an abortion,not necessary to save the life of the mother, or for the purposeof encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion notnecessary to save her life.

(L. 1986 H.B. 1596 § 2)

(1987) United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri Central Division, on March 17, 1987, held that section 188.205 was unconstitutional and the state was permanently enjoined from enforcing this provision. Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 655 F.Supp. 1300 (W.D.Mo. 1987).

(1988) United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that Missouri's ban on expenditure of public funds for purpose of performing or assisting abortions is constitutional but the portion of the section which prohibits the use of public funds for encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion is void for vagueness. Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 851 F.2d 1071 (8th Cir. 1988).

(1989) Where state interpretation of statute was that it was not directed at primary conduct of physicians or health care providers but was simply instruction to state's fiscal officers not to allocate public funds for abortion counseling, state-employed health professionals and private nonprofit corporations providing abortion services were no longer adversely affected by section and there was no longer case or controversy before a court. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 109 S.Ct. 3040.