Michigan judge overturns abortion law requiring 24-hour waiting period

With the injunction, Patel also voided much of the state’s informed consent counseling law and a ban on abortions being performed by highly qualified medical professionals – trained nurses, state-certified midwives and physician assistants.

This restriction “precludes qualified physicians from performing abortions without medical justification,” Patel wrote. They are “fully capable of performing early abortions” and “currently provide the same level of care to patients who experience miscarriage as patients seeking early abortions,” she added.

Patel, a judge appointed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, has not yet made a final decision in the case, but she wrote that the plaintiffs challenging the abortion restrictions are likely to succeed as their lawsuit moves forward.

An appeal is possible, although it is not yet clear who would lead that effort. Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel, a named defendant in the case, welcomed the injunction.

Related:

Patel’s decision was “a turning point,” said Rabia Muqaddam, senior attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Northland Family Planning Center, a longtime abortion provider in southeast Michigan, and Medical Students for Choice, a nonprofit focused on abortion education and family planning.

Muqaddam said in a statement that she hopes “the court will ultimately lift these harmful restrictions once and for all.”

“Michigan voters have made it clear that access to abortion is a fundamental right in their state and must be free from ideological influences,” Maquaddam said, adding that the controversial abortion restrictions “have a disproportionate impact on Michigan residents who already face health inequities.”

Genevieve Marnon, parliamentary director of the anti-abortion group Right to Life of Michigan, called Tuesday’s ruling “reckless” and said “women in Michigan should be warned” about the decision.

“This decision poses an immediate threat to women in our state who are considering abortion,” Marnon said in a statement.

“It is unconscionable to remove a short 24-hour waiting period and thereby deny patients the right to basic information about a major medical intervention they are considering – be it a medical procedure or a chemical intervention.”

Right to Life filed a lawsuit in federal court last year to overturn Proposition 3. The court argues that abortion access in Michigan violates rights enshrined in the federal constitution that apply to, among others, “the unborn and those born after a failed abortion.”

Northland and the medical student group filed their lawsuit in February, arguing that the abortion restrictions have no basis in medical care.

The lawsuit names Nessel and the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Both Nessel and DHHS Director Elizabeth Hertel previously stated that they also believe the laws are unconstitutional.

However, not all parts of Michigan’s informed consent law were affected by Tuesday’s decision. Patel declined to issue a preliminary injunction against a law that requires health care providers to screen patients for coercive behavior.

Northland and the group of medical students had argued that such screening would be “disturbing” for patients in coercive relationships and would seriously undermine the trust they have with their doctor.

And Dr. Natasha Bagdasarian, Michigan’s chief medical officer, had previously argued in an affidavit that the screening was unnecessary because licensed abortion doctors would naturally perform patient-specific mandatory screening as part of the abortion process.

Patel noted, however, that the coercive aspect of Michigan’s law – as well as laws requiring the need to provide assistance to victims of domestic violence – have “less impact on a patient’s decision-making” than measures that require a 24-hour waiting period.

Tuesday’s ruling still provides the necessary “time-critical care” for patients, Northland CEO Renee Chelian said in a brief statement.

“Finally, our patients can immediately access the time-critical care they seek without the government shaming them and making them wait,” she wrote.

Referring to the ongoing legal proceedings, she declined further comment.

Tuesday’s injunction was a victory for abortion rights groups in Michigan, but some of those groups pushed for other changes not affected by the court’s decision, including the proposed repeal of a parental consent law that remains in place.