A judge in Louisiana on Monday temporarily blocked the state from enforcing its “trigger law” banning abortions, allowing the procedure to continue in the state.
The ruling comes amid a wave of litigation in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision Friday to end constitutional protection for abortion.
The fall of Roe v. Wade shifted the battleground over abortion to courthouses around the country Monday, as one side sought quickly to put statewide bans into effect and the other tried to stop or at least delay such measures.
Many of the court cases will focus on “trigger laws,” adopted in 13 states in anticipation of the ruling and designed to take effect swiftly.
New Orleans Civil District Court Judge Robin Giarrusso issued a temporary restraining order after abortion rights activists argued that the state’s trigger laws are “void for vagueness,” noting that they lack a “clear and unambiguous effective date” as well as “adequate standing for enforceability,” as well as claiming that the ban violates the state’s constitution.
“A public health emergency is about to engulf the nation,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Louisiana’s abortion providers. “As expected, Louisiana and many other states wasted no time enacting bans and eliminating abortion entirely.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed in state court don’t deny that the state can now ban abortion. Instead, they contend Louisiana now has multiple, conflicting trigger mechanisms in the law.
They also argue that state law is unclear on whether it bans an abortion prior to a fertilized egg implanting in the uterus. And while the law provides an exception for “medically futile” pregnancies in cases of fetuses with lethal abnormalities, the plaintiffs noted the law gives no definition of the term.
“People who need an abortion right now are in a state of panic,” Northup continued. “We will be fighting to restore access in Louisiana and other states for as long as we can. Every day that a clinic is open and providing abortion services can make a difference in a person’s life.”
The temporary restraining order is in effect pending a July 8 hearing.
At least one of the state’s three abortion clinics said it would resume performing procedures on Tuesday.
“We’re going to do what we can,” Kathaleen Pittman, administrator of Hope Medical Group for Women, in Shreveport, told The Associated Press. “It could all come to a screeching halt.”
Also Monday, abortion rights advocates asked a Florida judge to block a new law there that bans the procedure after 15 weeks with some exceptions and is set to take effect this week.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona and an abortion-rights group filed an emergency motion Saturday seeking to block a 2021 law they worry can be used to halt all abortions. Planned Parenthood in Utah has challenged a trigger law there that contains narrow exceptions.
Brigitte Amiri, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Reproductive Freedom Project, said the organization is looking at “all options” to protect access to abortion.
As of Saturday, abortion services had stopped in at least 11 states — either because of state laws or confusion over them.
In some cases, the lawsuits may only buy time. Even if courts block some restrictions from taking hold, lawmakers in many conservative states could move quickly to address any flaws cited.
That’s likely to be the case in Louisiana. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed in state court don’t deny that the state can now ban abortion. Instead, they contend Louisiana now has multiple, conflicting trigger mechanisms in the law.
They also argue that state law is unclear on whether it bans an abortion prior to a fertilized egg implanting in the uterus. And while the law provides an exception for “medically futile” pregnancies in cases of fetuses with lethal abnormalities, the plaintiffs noted the law gives no definition of the term.
Around the country, challenges to other trigger laws could be made on the grounds that the conditions to impose the bans have not been met, or that it was improper for a past legislature to bind the current one.
Laura Herner, a professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, said other challenges might call into question whether state laws sufficiently and clearly allow for exceptions to protect the life or health of a pregnant woman.
Now that the high court has ruled that the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee the right to an abortion, abortion rights supporters will make the case that their state constitutions protect such a right.
A judge heard arguments on that issue Monday in Florida, where attorneys sought an emergency injunction to stop a new law from going into effect Friday. The ban beyond 15 weeks has exceptions to save the pregnant woman’s life or prevent physical harm or in cases where the fetus has a fatal abnormality. The ACLU of Florida has argued it violates the Florida Constitution.
In a separate lawsuit filed by a Jewish congregation in Florida, arguments over religious liberty and the separation of church and state will come into play.
Still other cases could be filed as states try to sort out whether abortion bans in place before Roe was decided — sometimes referred to as “zombie laws” — apply now that there is no federal protection for abortion.
For instance, Wisconsin passed a law in 1849 banning abortions except to save the life of the mother. Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, said he does not believe it is enforceable. Abortion opponents have called on lawmakers to impose a new ban.
In the meantime, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin said it immediately suspended all abortions, though the district attorneys in Madison and Milwaukee have suggested that they would not enforce the ban.
In Michigan, Planned Parenthood challenged a 1931 abortion ban ahead of last week’s Supreme Court ruling. In May, a judge said the ban could not be enforced because it violates the state’s constitution. Abortion rights supporters are now trying to get a proposed state constitutional amendment on the ballot in November to protect abortion and birth control.
Idaho, Oklahoma and Texas have adopted laws that allow people to seek bounties against those who help others get abortions. It is an open question as to whether that means people can be pursued across state lines, and legal challenges over those issues are likely to come up in cases of both surgical abortions and those using medicine mailed to patients.
The California Legislature, controlled by Democrats, passed a bill Thursday to shield abortion providers and volunteers in the state from civil judgments imposed by other states. In liberal Massachusetts, Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, signed an executive order Friday that prohibits state agencies from assisting other states’ investigations into anyone who receives a legal abortion in Massachusetts.
The challenge filed in Arizona, where most providers stopped offering abortions, said the legal questions are urgent.
Even if abortions resume in weeks or months, the plaintiffs said, “patients may be at greater risk of medical complications or may lose access to abortion altogether as a result of the delay.”