Planned Parenthood Great Northwest v. State
Plaintiffs claim that abortion ban violates the state constitution’s 1) separation of powers doctrine (Art. II, § 1), 2) prohibition on special legislation (Art. III, § 19), 3) guarantee of informational privacy (Art. I, §§ 1, 2, 17, 21), 4) guarantee of due process — prohibition on excessive and vague penalties (Art. I, § 13), 5) guarantee of equal protection (Art. I, §§ 1, 2), and 6) fundamental right to privacy in making intimate familial decisions (Art. I, §§ 1, 13, 17, 21). After the Idaho Supreme Court temporarily blocked the ban, it later allowed the ban to take effect pending a decision on the merits. The Court then declined to permanently block the ban, reasoning that the Idaho Constitution does not implicitly provide a fundamental right to an abortion because such a right is not “deeply rooted” in the state’s traditions and history.
Related Commentary
The Role of History and Tradition in State Court Abortion Cases
Some state courts weighed historical evidence and found abortion rights protections, diverging from the U.S. Supreme Court’s approach in Dobbs.
Levels of Scrutiny Applied by State Courts, Explained
The tests state courts use to decide whether a law impermissibly infringes on people’s rights play a big role in determining whether government restrictions on those rights are upheld.
Ohio’s Justice DeWine Attempts to Address Criticisms of Originalism
The Ohio Supreme Court justice outlines a framework that promotes state interpretations that differ from federal jurisprudence.
New State Hurdles to Standing Threaten Abortion Ban Challenges
Georgia’s Supreme Court sent a challenge to the state’s abortion ban back to the trial court to consider if the plaintiffs, including medical providers, had standing to bring the suit.