Court Halts North Dakota Abortion Ban During Appeal

Court Halts North Dakota Abortion Ban During Appeal \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ The North Dakota Supreme Court ruled to block the enforcement of the state’s abortion ban while an appeal on its constitutionality progresses. The law, which severely restricts abortion access, was struck down as unconstitutional in September. Advocates for reproductive rights welcomed the decision, citing risks to pregnant patients.

North Dakota Abortion Ban Halted: Quick Looks

• Court Decision: State Supreme Court blocks abortion ban enforcement during appeal.
• Law Status: Law found unconstitutional in September remains unenforced.
• Abortion Access: Limited to health- or life-saving cases at hospitals.
• Plaintiffs’ Argument: Ban risks delayed care for pregnancy complications.
• Future Litigation: Case to be fully litigated in North Dakota Supreme Court.

Deep Look

North Dakota’s strict abortion ban, which was previously declared unconstitutional, will remain unenforced while the state’s Supreme Court hears an appeal on the matter. The court’s decision on Friday ensures the law, which severely limits abortion access, will not take effect as the case progresses. This ruling has significant implications for reproductive rights in the state, where abortion access has already been curtailed following the closure of its last clinic in 2022.

The Legal Battle: How We Got Here

The current case stems from the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, which allowed states to implement their own abortion restrictions. In response, North Dakota enacted one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the nation. The Republican-controlled Legislature revised the state’s existing laws in 2023, criminalizing nearly all abortions.

Under the revised law:

• Abortions are only permitted to save the life of the mother or prevent a “serious health risk.”
• Exceptions for rape and incest are allowed but only up to six weeks of pregnancy—often before many women even know they are pregnant.
• Performing an abortion outside these narrow exceptions is considered a felony.

The plaintiffs, including the Center for Reproductive Rights and the Red River Women’s Clinic, challenged the law, arguing it was unconstitutionally vague and that its health exception was overly restrictive. State District Judge Bruce Romanick agreed, striking down the law as unconstitutional in September.

The Supreme Court’s Friday Ruling

While the state’s appeal of Romanick’s decision is ongoing, the North Dakota Supreme Court was asked to determine whether the ban could be enforced in the interim. The state’s attorneys argued that allowing the ban to take effect was necessary given the unresolved constitutional questions at hand.

Justice Daniel Crothers, writing for the three-member majority, rejected the state’s arguments, asserting that the legal grounds for enforcing the law were insufficient. He criticized the state’s rationale as overly tenuous:
“The upshot of the State’s argument is that any decision that recognizes a previously unobserved constitutional right should warrant a stay. We reject the request to adopt such a tenuous connection between the proposition advanced by the State and our precedent.”

The ruling upholds Judge Romanick’s earlier determination that enforcing a law found unconstitutional would be illogical and harmful.

Impact on Abortion Access

For now, abortion in North Dakota remains severely restricted, with the procedure only allowed in hospitals under life- or health-threatening circumstances. The closure of the state’s last abortion clinic in 2022 has left residents without in-state providers. Those seeking abortion services must travel to neighboring Minnesota, where the Red River Women’s Clinic relocated following the overturn of Roe v. Wade.

The plaintiffs stressed that keeping the ban blocked is critical for patients with pregnancy complications. They argued that the law’s vague language could deter healthcare providers from acting swiftly in emergencies, putting patients’ lives at risk.

Meetra Mehdizadeh, senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, lauded the court’s decision, stating:
“Today’s decision to keep the abortion ban blocked was the only logical outcome. People are dying without access to abortion, and still the State sought to stop pregnant North Dakotans facing dangerous situations from getting the care they need. It’s shameful. We will not stop fighting until this ban is struck down once and for all.”

State’s Argument and Response

North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley framed the ruling as procedural and expressed confidence in the law’s eventual enforcement.
“This is only a decision on the stay motion, not on the constitutional merits of the legislation,” Wrigley said. “North Dakota will continue moving forward to fully litigate this matter before the state Supreme Court, where we intend to establish that the law passed by our legislature is clearly constitutional.”

Republican state Senator Janne Myrdal, who introduced the 2023 abortion ban, similarly downplayed the significance of the ruling, stating:
“It’s not a reflection of the validity of the constitutionality of the law … and I don’t read anything more into that fact, actually.”

Challenges for Patients and Providers

The ruling highlights the precarious state of abortion access in North Dakota, where restrictive laws and the absence of local providers create significant barriers for residents. The plaintiffs emphasized that enforcing the ban could further complicate medical care for patients experiencing pregnancy complications.

North Dakota’s restrictions, among the most severe in the nation, mirror a growing trend in Republican-led states that have moved to implement near-total abortion bans post-Roe. These laws have faced widespread legal challenges, often hinging on questions of constitutionality and the clarity of their provisions.

The Center for Reproductive Rights confirmed that the Red River Women’s Clinic has no immediate plans to return to North Dakota, citing the hostile legal and political climate.

What’s Next for the Case?

The North Dakota Supreme Court will ultimately decide whether the state’s abortion ban is constitutional, a ruling that could have far-reaching implications. For now, the court’s decision to block enforcement provides temporary relief to those advocating for reproductive rights.

The case also raises broader questions about how states define and implement exceptions for life-threatening pregnancies and other emergencies. Critics argue that vague language in many abortion bans forces healthcare providers to navigate unclear legal terrain, often at the expense of timely medical care.

While Friday’s decision represents a victory for abortion rights advocates, the battle over reproductive healthcare in North Dakota is far from over. As the case moves forward, both sides are preparing for a final ruling that could shape the state’s abortion landscape for years to come.

More on US News

Court Halts North Court Halts North Court Halts North