In Louisville, Kentucky, a pregnant woman initiated legal proceedings on Tuesday in an effort to secure the right to an abortion amidst the state’s stringent near-total ban.
The lawsuit was lodged in a state court and argues that laws in Kentucky that restrict abortion access infringe upon the plaintiff’s rights to privacy and self-determination as outlined by the state constitution.
The woman, who is approximately seven weeks pregnant and has been referred to as Mary Poe to maintain her confidentiality, seeks the termination of her pregnancy but finds it illegal to do so under current regulations.
The legal document states, “Without the ability to decide whether to continue a pregnancy, Kentuckians have lost the right to make critical decisions about their health, bodies, lives, and futures.”
This lawsuit seeks class-action status, aiming to include individuals who are or will become pregnant and desire the option to have an abortion.
It specifically challenges Kentucky’s near-total trigger law ban and an additional law that prohibits abortions after six weeks, both of which were enacted by a Republican-controlled legislature.
The activation of the trigger law occurred following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022, which permits abortions only when the patient’s life is at risk or to avert serious injury. Notably, the law does not grant exceptions for instances of rape or incest.
This case draws parallels to a previous legal challenge made nearly a year ago by another pregnant woman looking to obtain an abortion. That case was ultimately withdrawn once the plaintiff discovered that her embryo had ceased to exhibit cardiac activity. However, advocates for abortion rights have asserted that the struggle for legal recourse is still ongoing.
Defendants in the current lawsuit include Russell Coleman, the Republican attorney general of Kentucky, although his office has yet to issue a response.
Last year, the Kentucky Supreme Court declined to suspend the near-total ban, leaving abortion access almost entirely denied in the state. In response, organizations advocating for abortion rights have been actively searching for a suitable plaintiff to mount a challenge against the existing restrictions.
