Read a Venezuelan Guard's 'Chilling' Account About the Delta Force Raid That Nabbed...
Watch What Happens When This Leftist Protester Accosts a CNN Reporter in Minneapolis
Is This Why the Media Isn't Covering the Iran Protests?
We’re in a Slow-Rolling Civil War, President Trump Needs to Recognize It
The Democrats' Hamas Problem
They Can Hate Israel All They Want
The Consequences of Leftist Lawlessness
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 302: What the Bible Says About Pain
While Democrats Promote Hoaxes, Republicans Must Stand for Truth
Minneapolis Radicals Begin Distributing Devices to Disable ICE Vehicles
Sons of Liberty, Sons of Legacy: Forming the Men Who Will Shape America’s...
Banning the Muslim Brotherhood: A Good Start, Part 2
The Problem of Clergy Sowing Discord
Former DC Cop Sentenced to 27 Years for Trafficking Minors
Venezuelan National Charged in Alleged $1 Billion Crypto Money Laundering Scheme
Tipsheet

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