State Abortion Legislation
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 State Abortion Legislation
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
State Abortion Legislation
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
State Abortion Legislation
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
37 State Abortion Legislation Cases
Arizona
Dec 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Reuss v. Arizona
Arizona health care providers filed a lawsuit challenging a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which is in violation of the state鈥檚 new constitutional amendment protecting the fundamental right to abortion. The case, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, asserts that the ban is unconstitutional because it denies Arizonans access to abortion care in violation of the new constitutional amendment passed by the voters.
Explore case
Arizona
Dec 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Reuss v. Arizona
Arizona health care providers filed a lawsuit challenging a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which is in violation of the state鈥檚 new constitutional amendment protecting the fundamental right to abortion. The case, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, asserts that the ban is unconstitutional because it denies Arizonans access to abortion care in violation of the new constitutional amendment passed by the voters.
Kentucky
Nov 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Mary Poe v. Russell Coleman, et al.
A Kentucky woman who is pregnant and seeking an abortion filed a lawsuit in Jefferson County Circuit Court seeking to strike down two abortion bans under the state constitutional rights to privacy and self-determination. The case details the severe harms that Kentuckians seeking abortion, like Plaintiff Mary Poe suffer because the government denies them access to the care they needs The lawsuit also requests the court certify a class of all pregnant individuals who seek access to abortion in the Commonwealth but cannot obtain that care because of Kentucky鈥檚 abortion bans. If successful, this lawsuit would restore access to abortion in the Commonwealth.
Explore case
Kentucky
Nov 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Mary Poe v. Russell Coleman, et al.
A Kentucky woman who is pregnant and seeking an abortion filed a lawsuit in Jefferson County Circuit Court seeking to strike down two abortion bans under the state constitutional rights to privacy and self-determination. The case details the severe harms that Kentuckians seeking abortion, like Plaintiff Mary Poe suffer because the government denies them access to the care they needs The lawsuit also requests the court certify a class of all pregnant individuals who seek access to abortion in the Commonwealth but cannot obtain that care because of Kentucky鈥檚 abortion bans. If successful, this lawsuit would restore access to abortion in the Commonwealth.
South Carolina Supreme Court
Nov 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Planned Parenthood聽South聽Atlantic v. Wilson
This case in the South Carolina Supreme Court involves the question whether a ban on abortion, the 鈥2023 Fetal Heartbeat Act,鈥 forbids abortion starting after approximately nine weeks of pregnancy or, as the state contends, earlier at six weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they are pregnant. This case is the third state supreme court proceeding in South Carolina involving a post-Dobbs challenge to an abortion ban. The outcome will substantially affect access to reproductive care in the state.
Explore case
South Carolina Supreme Court
Nov 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Planned Parenthood聽South聽Atlantic v. Wilson
This case in the South Carolina Supreme Court involves the question whether a ban on abortion, the 鈥2023 Fetal Heartbeat Act,鈥 forbids abortion starting after approximately nine weeks of pregnancy or, as the state contends, earlier at six weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they are pregnant. This case is the third state supreme court proceeding in South Carolina involving a post-Dobbs challenge to an abortion ban. The outcome will substantially affect access to reproductive care in the state.
Texas
Jun 2024
State Abortion Legislation
+3 桃子视频
Gonzalez v. Ramirez et al.
Although Texas law clearly prohibits prosecuting people for terminating their pregnancies, Starr County officials indicted, arrested, and jailed Lizelle Gonzalez for having an abortion. The ACLU鈥檚 Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative and Criminal Law Reform Project, alongside the 桃子视频of Texas and south Texas firm Garza Martinez, are representing Ms. Gonzalez in a lawsuit against Starr County and local officials based on violations of Ms. Gonzalez鈥檚 constitutional rights.
Explore case
Texas
Jun 2024
State Abortion Legislation
+3 桃子视频
Gonzalez v. Ramirez et al.
Although Texas law clearly prohibits prosecuting people for terminating their pregnancies, Starr County officials indicted, arrested, and jailed Lizelle Gonzalez for having an abortion. The ACLU鈥檚 Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative and Criminal Law Reform Project, alongside the 桃子视频of Texas and south Texas firm Garza Martinez, are representing Ms. Gonzalez in a lawsuit against Starr County and local officials based on violations of Ms. Gonzalez鈥檚 constitutional rights.
Maryland Supreme Court
Jun 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Moira Akers v. State
This case concerns whether prosecutors can admit evidence that a person exercised their right to decide whether to terminate their pregnancy as proof of intent for murder. Here, the prosecution鈥檚 use of this evidence at Moira Akers鈥 trial denied her due process, resulting in an unjust conviction and a 30-year prison term. The ACLU鈥檚 Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative, alongside the 桃子视频of Maryland, filed an amicus brief arguing that allowing admission of this evidence not only violated Ms. Akers鈥 rights but chills the right of all Marylanders to freely decide whether to continue or end their pregnancies. Ms. Akers鈥 case was granted certiorari and is now before the Maryland Supreme Court.
Explore case
Maryland Supreme Court
Jun 2024
State Abortion Legislation
Moira Akers v. State
This case concerns whether prosecutors can admit evidence that a person exercised their right to decide whether to terminate their pregnancy as proof of intent for murder. Here, the prosecution鈥檚 use of this evidence at Moira Akers鈥 trial denied her due process, resulting in an unjust conviction and a 30-year prison term. The ACLU鈥檚 Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative, alongside the 桃子视频of Maryland, filed an amicus brief arguing that allowing admission of this evidence not only violated Ms. Akers鈥 rights but chills the right of all Marylanders to freely decide whether to continue or end their pregnancies. Ms. Akers鈥 case was granted certiorari and is now before the Maryland Supreme Court.