Iowa 6 Week Abortion Ban Approval: Supreme Court Ruling and Reactions

0
88

Under the rational basis test, Justice McDermott stated, the state has to show only that the law is rationally related to advancing a legitimate state interest, and Planned Parenthood cannot show a likelihood of success on the merits. Justices Christopher McDonald, Dana Oxley, and David May joined the majority opinion.

Iowa 6 Week Abortion Ban Approval: Dissenting Opinion

Chief Justice Susan Christensen criticized the decision in a dissenting opinion. “Today, our court’s majority strips Iowa women of their bodily autonomy by holding that there is no fundamental right to terminate a pregnancy under our state constitution,” Justice Christensen said. “The majority’s rigid approach relies heavily on the male-dominated history and traditions of the 1800s, all the while ignoring how far women’s rights have come since the Civil War era.” Justices Edward M. Mansfield and Thomas D. Waterman joined the dissent.

Legislative and Legal Background

The anti-abortion law was approved in 2023 during a special session called by Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Republican. Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and other plaintiffs quickly sued, alleging the ban violated state constitutional rights, including the right to due process, and secured a preliminary injunction from a district court. Friday’s ruling centers on the merits of the injunction.

Signup for the USA Herald exclusive Newsletter

Iowa 6 Week Abortion Ban Approval: Political Reactions

Reynolds and other Republican leaders praised the ruling. “There is no right more sacred than life, and nothing more worthy of our strongest defense than the innocent unborn,” Reynolds said in a statement Friday. Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird called the ruling “a landmark victory” in a broader fight. “We will keep working to support Iowa families, parents, and the unborn as the fight for life continues,” she said.

Opposition Response

Ruth Richardson, president, and CEO of Planned Parenthood North Central States, called the ruling “dangerous and reprehensible.” She stated, “We have spent months planning for the possibility of this new reality, putting in place patient navigators and other supports to connect patients with the care they so desperately need — both now and in the future.”