The 2028 GOP Nominee Is Going to Be JD Vance, Probably
Here's What Tulsi Gabbard Will Disclose Before She Leaves Her Post
Georgia Sets Its Date to Redraw Their Maps for 2028. Also, the Latest...
Here's More About the White House Shooter. Yes, This Guy Sounds Like a...
NBC Reporter Who Displayed Zero Survival Instincts During WH Shooting Goes Viral...in a...
The Cleveland Cavaliers Coach Didn't Just Say That...
Democrats Sure Hate Jews
May I Do the Thinking, Please?
Who’s the Boss? Trump, That’s Who
The Art of War, Not the Deal
The Last Hurrah of the RINO Establishment
Memorial Day: America’s Transcendent Holiday
The Poisonous Proposal That Should Alarm Every American
Illinois Woman Sentenced to Prison for Leading 14-Person Pandemic Loan Fraud Scheme
The Numbers That Ended The Late Show: $100M Budget, $40M Loss, 2.7M Viewers
Tipsheet

Judge Halts Several Abortion Regulations in This State

Judge Halts Several Abortion Regulations in This State
AP Photo/Rebecca Santana

A Michigan judge issued a preliminary injunction against the state’s 24-hour waiting period for getting an abortion, the state’s “informed consent” law, and a ban on advanced practice clinicians from providing abortions.

Advertisement

According to the Detroit Free Press, the lawsuit was brought forward by the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of an abortion provider and Medical Students for choice. 

Reportedly, the passage of a pro-abortion ballot measure that enshrined abortion rights in the state’s constitution was the reason for the injunction (DFP):

Proposal 3's passage, Patel wrote, blocks the state from enforcing the 24-hour waiting period and informed consent laws in Michigan, as well as the state's ban on advanced practice clinicians (APCs) providing abortion care. Preliminary injunctions are court orders that prevent a party, in this case the state of Michigan, from continuing a practice deemed harmful to plaintiffs when a judge determines plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their legal challenge.

"Turning to whether the challenged laws burden or infringe upon the freedom to make and effectuate decisions about abortion care, the Court finds, on the record currently before it and for purposes of issuing preliminary injunctive relief, that they do," Patel reportedly wrote.

Advertisement

Related:

ABORTION

The judge added that the waiting period for abortions creates a “needless delay” for patients.

"That is, at this time, the Court is convinced that the mandatory delay exacerbates the burdens that patients experience seeking abortion care, including by increasing costs, prolonging wait times, increasing the risk that a patient will have to disclose their decision to others, and potentially preventing a patient from having the type of abortion that they prefer," Patel wrote.

Patel did not issue a preliminary injunction against part of the law that requires abortion providers to determine if a patient was coerced into having an abortion.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement