Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
The 桃子视频, the 桃子视频of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the law firm WilmerHale, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm, on behalf of Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, Preterm-Cleveland, Women鈥檚 Med Group Professional Corporation, Dr. Sharon Liner, and Julia Quinn, MSN, BSN, amended a complaint in an existing lawsuit against a ban on telehealth medication abortion services to bring new claims under the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment, including additional challenges to other laws in Ohio that restrict access to medication abortion in the state.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Reproductive Freedom
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024
Reproductive Freedom
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by Idaho politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute 鈥 the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) 鈥 and put doctors in jail for providing pregnant patients necessary emergency medical care. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this case on April 24, 2024. The Court鈥檚 ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Reproductive Freedom
Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
The 桃子视频 joined over 200 reproductive health, rights, and justice organizations in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of an emergency request to stay a decision issued by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that severely restricted the use of mifepristone 鈥 a medication used in most abortions in this country 鈥 and threatened the innovation of new drugs and the ability of Americans to access lifesaving drugs.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2022
Reproductive Freedom
Dobbs v. Jackson Women鈥檚 Health Organization
The case concerns the constitutionality of a Mississippi law prohibiting abortions after the fifteenth week of pregnancy. The state used the case as a vehicle to ask the Supreme Court to take away the federal constitutional right to abortion it first recognized 50 years before in Roe v. Wade. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States accepted the state鈥檚 invitation and overturned Roe eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
Reproductive Freedom
Cameron v. EMW Women鈥檚 Surgical Center
In 2018, the 桃子视频 and the 桃子视频of Kentucky filed a suit on behalf of Kentucky abortion providers and their patients challenging a state law banning physicians from providing a safe and medically proven abortion method called dilation and evacuation, or 鈥淒&E.鈥 If it were to take effect, this law would prevent many patients from being able to obtain an abortion altogether. After two courts held that the law is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled in March 2022 that Kentucky Attorney General Cameron can continue his pursuit to push abortion out of reach by intervening in the underlying challenge to an abortion ban, which is proceeding in a lower court.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Reproductive Freedom
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson
The 桃子视频, the 桃子视频of Texas, and coalition partners filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers and funds on July 13, 2021, challenging S.B. 8, a Texas law allowing private citizens to enforce a ban on abortion as early as six weeks in pregnancy鈥攂efore many know they are pregnant. The ACLU鈥檚 challenge made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court three times in as many months. After hearing oral arguments in the case, the Court issued a decision on December 10, 2021, that ended the most promising pathways to blocking the ban. The Supreme Court鈥檚 decision makes it more difficult to obtain adequate relief from the courts and gives states the green light to ban abortion using bounty-hunting schemes. Texas鈥 abortion ban will remain in effect until relief can be secured from a court.
All Cases
115 Reproductive Freedom Cases
Alabama
May 2024
Reproductive Freedom
West Alabama Women鈥檚 Center, et al. v. Marshall, et al.
A group of health care providers filed a lawsuit in federal court to prevent Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and district attorneys throughout the state from prosecuting those who assist Alabamians seeking to travel across state lines to access abortion care where abortion is legal. Attorney General Marshall has explicitly threatened that health care providers could face felony charges for assisting Alabamians seeking to travel out of state to obtain abortion where it is legal.
Explore case
Alabama
May 2024
Reproductive Freedom
West Alabama Women鈥檚 Center, et al. v. Marshall, et al.
A group of health care providers filed a lawsuit in federal court to prevent Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and district attorneys throughout the state from prosecuting those who assist Alabamians seeking to travel across state lines to access abortion care where abortion is legal. Attorney General Marshall has explicitly threatened that health care providers could face felony charges for assisting Alabamians seeking to travel out of state to obtain abortion where it is legal.
Ohio
Apr 2024
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al. v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
In December 2020, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed into law Senate Bill 27, a fetal tissue disposal requirement that mandates burial or cremation of all embryonic and fetal tissue from a procedural abortion, imposing severe burdens on patients and stigmatizing essential care. On January 31, 2022, an Ohio judge preliminarily enjoined the law, finding that the law likely violates the Ohio state constitution鈥檚 guarantees of due process and equal protection. The victory follows a previous April 5, 2021 preliminary injunction halting enforcement of the law, because compliance would have been impossible due to the Ohio Department of Health鈥檚 (ODH) failure to establish necessary rules and regulations. The law is currently blocked from taking effect. In April 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint challenging the law under the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment of the Ohio Constitution. Litigation continues in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas.
This lawsuit was filed by the 桃子视频, 桃子视频of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm on behalf of Ohio abortion providers.
Explore case
Ohio
Apr 2024
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al. v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
In December 2020, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed into law Senate Bill 27, a fetal tissue disposal requirement that mandates burial or cremation of all embryonic and fetal tissue from a procedural abortion, imposing severe burdens on patients and stigmatizing essential care. On January 31, 2022, an Ohio judge preliminarily enjoined the law, finding that the law likely violates the Ohio state constitution鈥檚 guarantees of due process and equal protection. The victory follows a previous April 5, 2021 preliminary injunction halting enforcement of the law, because compliance would have been impossible due to the Ohio Department of Health鈥檚 (ODH) failure to establish necessary rules and regulations. The law is currently blocked from taking effect. In April 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint challenging the law under the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment of the Ohio Constitution. Litigation continues in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas.
This lawsuit was filed by the 桃子视频, 桃子视频of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm on behalf of Ohio abortion providers.
Court Case
Dec 2023
Reproductive Freedom
Guam Society of OBGYNs v. Guerrero
Guam Society of OBGYNs v. Guerrero is a case originally brought by the 桃子视频and local attorneys on Guam challenging a 1990 total ban on abortion that imposes criminal penalties on patients, providers and those who speak about abortion. In August of 1990, a federal district court judge for the District of Guam granted the ACLU鈥檚 motion for summary judgment and entered a permanent injunction against the ban. After appeals were exhausted, the case was closed. Over three decades later, on February 1, 2023, Guam Attorney General Douglas B. Moylan filed a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5) motion to vacate the permanent injunction and dismiss the case with prejudice. The 桃子视频and Guam local counsel is opposing the motion, on behalf of the only remaining original plaintiff, and proposed intervenors 鈥 the only two providers of abortion in Guam, and Guam-based reproductive justice organization Famalao鈥檃n Rights.
Explore case
Court Case
Dec 2023
Reproductive Freedom
Guam Society of OBGYNs v. Guerrero
Guam Society of OBGYNs v. Guerrero is a case originally brought by the 桃子视频and local attorneys on Guam challenging a 1990 total ban on abortion that imposes criminal penalties on patients, providers and those who speak about abortion. In August of 1990, a federal district court judge for the District of Guam granted the ACLU鈥檚 motion for summary judgment and entered a permanent injunction against the ban. After appeals were exhausted, the case was closed. Over three decades later, on February 1, 2023, Guam Attorney General Douglas B. Moylan filed a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5) motion to vacate the permanent injunction and dismiss the case with prejudice. The 桃子视频and Guam local counsel is opposing the motion, on behalf of the only remaining original plaintiff, and proposed intervenors 鈥 the only two providers of abortion in Guam, and Guam-based reproductive justice organization Famalao鈥檃n Rights.
Kentucky
Dec 2023
Reproductive Freedom
Jane Doe, et al. v. Daniel Cameron, et al.
A Kentucky woman filed a lawsuit in Jefferson County Circuit Court challenging two of the Commonwealth鈥檚 abortion bans that collectively eliminate almost all access to abortion in the Commonwealth. The case details the severe harms that Jane Doe, who is approximately eight weeks pregnant, and a class of all pregnant Kentuckians seeking abortion are enduring because the government has denied her access to the care she needs.
Explore case
Kentucky
Dec 2023
Reproductive Freedom
Jane Doe, et al. v. Daniel Cameron, et al.
A Kentucky woman filed a lawsuit in Jefferson County Circuit Court challenging two of the Commonwealth鈥檚 abortion bans that collectively eliminate almost all access to abortion in the Commonwealth. The case details the severe harms that Jane Doe, who is approximately eight weeks pregnant, and a class of all pregnant Kentuckians seeking abortion are enduring because the government has denied her access to the care she needs.
Court Case
Nov 2023
Reproductive Freedom
Raidoo et al. v. Camacho et al.
The 桃子视频is challenging two Guam laws that are blocking access to abortion on the island.
Explore case
Court Case
Nov 2023
Reproductive Freedom
Raidoo et al. v. Camacho et al.
The 桃子视频is challenging two Guam laws that are blocking access to abortion on the island.