Planned Parenthood v. Utah
Plaintiffs claim that the near-total abortion ban violates the state constitution’s 1) right to determine family composition and to parent (Art. I, §§ 2, 25, and 27), 2) Equal Rights Amendment (Art. IV, § 1), 3) right to uniform operation of laws (Art. I, §§ 2, 24), 4) right to bodily integrity and privacy (Art. I, §§ 1, 7, 11), 5) right of conscience (Art. I, § 4), and 6) right to privacy (Art. I, §§ 1, 14). A trial court preliminarily blocked the ban. The defendants appealed to the Utah Supreme Court, which has kept the injunction temporarily in place pending a decision on the merits. The plaintiffs subsequently requested that the trial court also allow them to challenge the hospital-only requirement, which they claim functionally bans abortion and violates the state constitution’s 1) right to determine family composition and to parent (Art. I, §§ 2, 25, and 27), 2) Equal Rights Amendment (Art. IV, § 1), 3) right to uniform operation of laws (Art. I, §§ 2, 24), 4) right to bodily integrity and privacy (Art. I, §§ 1, 7, 11), and 5) right to privacy (Art. I, §§ 1, 14). A trial court preliminarily blocked the ban. The Utah Supreme Court upheld the preliminary injunction.
Related Commentary
A New Way Some State Courts Limit Abortion Rights
Hostile courts are increasingly using procedural hurdles to limit access to abortion, allowing them to avoid explicitly grappling with questions over reproductive rights.
How Originalism Revived an Abortion Ban a Majority of the North Dakota Supreme Court Held Unconstitutional
Although three of the five justices on the court concluded the ban violated state due process rights, a state rule requiring a supermajority to strike down a law means the dissenting opinion controls.
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.
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.