Several abortion restrictions ruled unconstitutional by Minnesota district court

Authored by cbsnews.com and submitted by thedubiousstylus

ST. PAUL, Minn. -- Several of Minnesota's abortion restrictions violate the state constitution, a Ramsey County judge ruled Monday, blocking enforcement of them effective immediately.

The laws struck down include a 24-hour waiting period; parental notification if a minor seeks an abortion; disclosure of certain medical information before the procedure; and a provision that only allowed doctors to perform abortions.

"These abortion laws violate the right to privacy because they infringe upon the fundamental right under the Minnesota Constitution to access abortion care and do not withstand strict scrutiny," Judge Thomas Gilligan wrote.

The ruling in Ramsey County district court comes in wake of the U.S. Supreme Court last month overturning Roe v. Wade in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a move that has left the country with a patchwork of laws that in some cases seriously curtail or outright ban abortion.

The 1995 Minnesota Supreme Court in Doe v. Gomez found that the state constitution protects the right to an abortion and those protections are more broad than those afforded under Roe.

Pro-abortion rights advocates cheered the decision by Gilligan as a victory for those who live in Minnesota and will travel here for access. Minnesota is surrounded by states that have laws that seriously restrict or ban abortion, or are likely to pass limits.

"Today's ruling is a huge step forward to removing those barriers and ensuring Minnesota is a place where everyone can get the care that they need without government interference," said Erin May Quade, advocacy director for Gender Justice, the organization that represented the plaintiffs.

The order said a law permitting abortions only in a hospital after the first trimester is also unconstitutional. The court let reporting requirements to the state health department stand but nullified the criminal penalties for violating that law.

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life called the district court decision "extreme" and described the challenged laws as "commonsense measures that support and empower pregnant women." The group said the state needs to appeal.

"Even the U.S. Supreme Court, under Roe v. Wade and subsequent decisions, allowed these very modest types of laws," said Scott Fischbach, MCCL's executive director. "Yet today's ruling blocks them and prevents Minnesotans from enacting reasonable protections for unborn children and their mothers."

Attorney General Keith Ellison said Monday that he hadn't read the 140-page ruling and his office would need to evaluate then decision. He and the other co-defendants have 60 days to decide to appeal.

"I believe in a woman's right to choose. But I also have a duty to defend Minnesota's statutes," Ellison said. "Both of those are my jobs at the same time. We're going to take good, strong look at the decision."

House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt, R-Crown, echoed Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life in calling for Ellison to appeal.

"Attorney General Ellison has a constitutional duty to defend our state laws and must immediately appeal this decision," Daudt said. "The effort by pro-abortion activists and their liberal donors will put lives at risk by allowing non-physicians to perform abortions and second or third trimester abortions to be performed in non-medical settings."

Planned Parenthood North Central States, the largest abortion provider in Minnesota, previously estimated the state could see a 25% increase in patients from out-of-state after the fall of Roe.

Shayla Walker, executive director of Our Justice -- the largest abortion fund in the state and a plaintiff in the case -- said all of the Minnesota's now-voided restrictions worked in tandem to restrict access, but she speculated striking down the physicians-only law would have the most significant impact.

"We've seen people waiting two to three weeks -- right now I have someone in my inbox who has to travel to Colorado because they weren't able to get care in timely manner in Minnesota," Walker said. "And now that more providers are able to offer this service, that is going to be definitely a game changer for people who are coming to Minnesota."

Whoofukingcares on July 12nd, 2022 at 02:34 UTC »

So it’s the state constitution and since the fed left it up to the states this is a good thing for women in Minnesota

spannerboy69 on July 11st, 2022 at 20:37 UTC »

Blue states gonna blue extra hard now.

blarneyone on July 11st, 2022 at 19:37 UTC »

Good on you, Minnesota.