Phil Kline claims that he needs the records for criminal investigations. You can the New York Times article here (requires registration. Or here’s CNN”s story.
How can Kline believe that his investigation claim will hold water? This is nothing more than scare tactics. On top of complete medical files, Kline needs psychological profiles. Does that bring up a huge red flag for anyone else?
Does Kline have a legal leg to stand on?
State District Judge Richard Anderson seems to think so.
I havn’t read his ruling.
According to this local article, http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/10985570.htm (may require registration ), Kansas law allows secret ‘inquisitions’ during criminal investigations. He says he’s investigating minors who had abortions and the potential abuse ramifications, as apparently 78 of the 90 records he’s requesting involved teenagers under 14. The article didn’t say what the other 12 were being investigated for. The clinics (unnamed) say they already turned in the required information at the time.
FWIW, opinion around here is that he’s looking for something to deflect from his recent “evolution is just a theory” sticker brouhaha (I could swear there was a Pit thread about it, but I’m not finding it), where he got his butt handed to him. Not only did people not favor the stickers in science textbooks the way he thought they would, there also appears to be a possibility he violated Kansas open-meeting laws through his talks with the State Board of Education. From the LTTE’s I’ve seen, folks around these parts don’t want a repeat of the state’s 1999 stint as a national laughingstock over evolution.