Bill Maher Reveals Why He's Harder on Dems Today...and It Was Something
Bang Up Job, Gavin! Newsom's Press Office Launches Lame Attack on Reflecting Pool...
Today's DEI Law School Students Are the Judges Democrats Will Pack the Courts...
When Propaganda Becomes Psychological Abuse
Nick Kristallnacht
Brothers From Ghana Among Three Charged in Online Romance Scam Targeting Seniors
10 Shootings Rock South Austin; 2 Suspects in Custody, 1 Still at Large
The White House Issues a Powerful Message of Prayer in Celebration of Rededication...
All of the Worst People Are Coming Out to Support Thomas Massie
Trump Warns Iran: 'Get Moving' or 'There Won't Be Anything Left'
America at 250: Renewing the Faith That Made Us Free
Two Navy Aircraft Suffer Mid-Air Collision at Idaho Air Show
Ken Paxton Scores Historic Win Against the Transgender Movement
Ukraine Launches Drone Attack on Moscow Targeting Oil Infrastructure
Cuba Acquires Over 300 Attack Drones As Tensions With US Rise
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