Other than death and taxes, two things are certain in life:
The Florida Legislature will soon pass a parental notice requirement for a minor seeking an abortion.
Just as quickly, someone will file a lawsuit to try to stop it from becoming law.
The last time the Legislature passed such a law, in 1999, the Florida Supreme Court struck it down, ruling last year that it violated the privacy clause in the state Constitution. "Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion ..." begins the privacy clause, adopted by voters in 1980.
In the opinion of the justices, Florida's privacy clause is there to protect the rights of minors, not just adults. But the opinion of House Speaker Johnnie Byrd matters more at the moment.
"The liberal majority on the Florida Supreme Court has taken us way out, way off the mainstream," Byrd said this week.
Byrd, a U.S. Senate candidate, is the House sponsor of the parental notice bill, HJR 1, symbolically Byrd's No. 1 priority. It is highly unusual for the Legislature's presiding officers to sponsor bills in their names, but this is no ordinary time.
"The polling on this issue is tremendous," said Rep. Sandra Murman, R-Tampa, getting to the heart of the matter. "People in Florida believe this is something that should be in the Constitution."
The House will pass its bill next week. It's a proposed constitutional amendment, meaning voters must approve putting parental notice in the state Constitution. Then the Legislature will pass a state law in 2005. The proposal does not prohibit abortions or require a parent's consent for an abortion - only notification.
The latest version flew out of the House Judiciary Committee on a 17-2 vote Thursday. Democrats and Republicans agreed that if a child can't take a Tylenol or attend a class trip without a parent's knowledge, she shouldn't be allowed to secretly have an abortion.
"For crying out loud, I want to be notified," said Rep. Kevin Ambler, R-Tampa, who has a 14-year-old daughter.
"The timing of it may be suspect," said Rep. Curtis Richardson, D-Tallahassee, "but it certainly isn't a partisan issue."
Who's against it? Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and the Florida Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, which for years has pushed for equal rights and equal pay laws in Florida.
"I'm aghast that they would even consider it," said Rachel Sieg of DeLand, president of the state federation, who has a son and a daughter. "They're taking away a minor's right to privacy. ... They're not putting the kid first."
Planned Parenthood, citing a 1992 study, said most minors seeking abortions tell their parents, and most of those who did not come from homes where abuse or violence is present.
Planned Parenthood lobbyists were suspicious when they discovered that the bill before the Judiciary Committee on Thursday was not the same one that passed the House a few days before. Absent was a provision to exempt cases of incest by a father and stepfather from a notice requirement.
Rep. Jack Seiler, D-Fort Lauderdale, voted for the bill but said: "I'm hearing back home, "Why is government trying to get involved in our families?"'
Guided by Jonathan Turley, a $300-an-hour constitutional law expert hired by Byrd, House members are trying to craft a proposal that can withstand scrutiny by a majority of the seven Florida justices.
A parental notice amendment is a priority in the Senate, too, but now there's talk of senators hiring their own constitutional law expert.
"This is an area where if you put the word parental next to notice or consent, you'll have briefs coming across the transom within seconds," Turley told House members. "That's appropriate. This is an issue people feel strongly about on both sides."
Translation: See you in court.
- Steve Bousquet is deputy capital bureau chief of the Times.
