BISMARCK, N.D. — A ruling by the North Dakota Supreme Court has put a hold on the enforcement of the state’s abortion ban while an appeal is in progress regarding a previous court decision that deemed the law unconstitutional. This appeal process is still ongoing after a lower court declared the ban ineffective last September.
Currently, North Dakota has no operating abortion clinics since the only clinic relocated from Fargo to Moorhead, Minnesota, in 2022. Under the existing regulations, the only circumstances under which abortions can take place in the state are limited to situations threatening the life or health of the mother, and these procedures must be conducted in a hospital setting.
The parties challenging the ban argued that preventing its enforcement is crucial, especially for individuals facing pregnancy complications who require immediate medical attention. Delays in care could occur due to the implications of the ban. In opposition, state attorneys requested the court to allow the ban to take effect during the appeal, citing that this case embodies complex constitutional questions of significant concern to the citizens of North Dakota.
State District Judge Bruce Romanick previously denied the request from the state, emphasizing that it wouldn’t be sensible to keep an unconstitutional law active while under appeal. The Center for Reproductive Rights, which is legally representing the abortion clinic and several physicians opposing the law, also voiced their concerns against reinstating the ban, and arguments regarding the state’s request were presented in court last November.
In the opinion of the court’s three-member majority, Justice Daniel Crothers provided various legal justifications for their decision. He noted the state’s argument seemed to imply that any acknowledgement of a previously unrecognized constitutional right should result in a stay. The court rejected such an argument, emphasizing the inapplicability of that rationale to their existing legal precedents.
The decision was welcomed by the plaintiffs involved in the case. Meetra Mehdizadeh, a senior staff attorney from the Center for Reproductive Rights, expressed that it was the only reasonable conclusion to maintain the ban’s suspension. She underscored the life-threatening scenarios that individuals could face without access to abortion services and condemned the state’s efforts to impose restrictions in hazardous circumstances, vowing to continue fighting until the ban is permanently dismissed.
Addressing the ruling, North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley clarified that this decision solely pertains to the stay motion and does not reflect the constitutional validity of the abortion law itself. He confirmed that the state would persist in its legal pursuits in the Supreme Court, aiming to demonstrate that the legislation is indeed constitutional.
This ongoing case follows a tumultuous journey that began when the Red River Women’s Clinic contested the previous abortion ban after the U.S. Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade in 2022. In 2023, North Dakota’s Legislature, under Republican control, updated the state’s abortion legislation, classifying the performance of an abortion as a felony. Exceptions apply solely for safeguarding the mother’s life or addressing significant health risks. There are also stipulations for cases of rape or incest, limited to six weeks of gestation, which is often before many women realize they are pregnant. The plaintiffs in the case argue that this law is not only vague but also excessively restrictive in its health exception provisions.
Republican State Senator Janne Myrdal, who sponsored the legislation, interpreted the recent ruling as not indicative of a setback, asserting that it does not affect her confidence in the law’s constitutional integrity. Meanwhile, a representative from the Center for Reproductive Rights indicated that there are currently no intentions for the clinic to reestablish its presence in North Dakota.
