en en en en en fr en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en en
An Iowa judge has permanently blocked a state law requiring women to wait 24 hours before getting an abortion.
In his order, filed Monday afternoon, District Court Judge Mitchell Turner held that the 2020 law is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced on two grounds: that the Legislature violated the "single-subject rule" of the Iowa Constitution when lawmakers passed the measure as an amendment to an unrelated bill; and that the law violates a 2018 Iowa Supreme Court decision that protects abortion rights.
The law was opposed in court by Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa. Turner had previously issued a temporary injunction blocking the law just before it was to take effect July 1, 2020. Monday's order makes that injunction permanent. In his order, Turner also canceled a planned trial in the case, which was set for January.
At a press conference Tuesday, Planned Parenthood North Central States Director of Public Affairs Jamie Burch Elliott said the law was "medically unnecessary and harmful" and would have effectively put abortion access out of reach for many people.
"Once again, the court righted a legislative overreach related to abortion care, and the court’s decision means access to safe and legal abortion in Iowa remains unchanged," Elliott said.
Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Republican who signed the law last year, said she will appeal the ruling.
"In a court ruling issued yesterday, an Iowa District Court wrongly struck down our efforts to protect all innocent human life," Reynolds said in a statement. "I will be working with our legal counsel to appeal this recent decision, and I believe we can win."
Lynn Hicks, a spokesperson for the Iowa Attorney General's office, which represents Reynolds, said the office intends to file a notice to appeal the case Tuesday afternoon.
More:The Iowa Legislature made major changes on guns, masks, abortion and more. Find out what it did — and didn't — do.
Judge: Last-minute 'tricks' and 'mischiefs' violated Constitution's single subject rule
Iowa lawmakers added the 24-hour waiting requirement late in the 2020 legislative session to a bill related to providing life-sustaining medical care to minors. Although House Speaker Pat Grassley, R-New Hartford, initially found the amendment was not germane to the bill, the House voted to suspend its rules and passed the measure in a late-night vote on June 14, 2020, which was followed early the next morning by a vote in the Senate.
That process runs afoul of the Iowa Constitution's "single-subject rule," which requires that each law cover a single topic as described in its title, according to Turner. The last-minute legislative maneuvers denied both legislators and the public time to comment and deliberate on the proposal, he wrote.
"Upon review of both the Iowa Senate and House videos, it is abundantly clear to this Court that what occurred in the Iowa Legislature on June 13th and 14th, 2020 was exactly such 'tricks in legislation' and 'mischiefs' that the single-subject rule exists to prevent," he wrote.
ACLU of Iowa Legal Director Rita Bettis Austen said Tuesday that even many legislators were taken aback when the abortion amendment was introduced.
"There’s a process that we go through when we pass a bill into law so that everyone who has a right to take part in that democratic process, which includes all of us, can do so and contact our representatives," she said.
Iowa courts have struck down many recent abortion restrictions
Turner also found the law was barred by a 2018 Iowa Supreme Court ruling that found women have a fundamental right to receive an abortion under the Iowa Constitution.
"Given this clear precedent, this Court finds that Petitioners have established that a twenty-four hour waiting requirement is an invasion or threatened invasion 'upon the fundamental rights of the people,'" he wrote.
Iowa law currently bans most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Monday's injunction continues a string of losses in court for Iowa Republicans over laws passed to limit abortions.
The Iowa Legislature has passed several abortion restrictions in recent years, including a 72-hour waiting period to receive an abortion, which the Iowa Supreme Court struck down with its 2018 decision establishing abortion as a constitutional right.
A so-called "fetal heartbeat" law that would have banned most abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected was also struck down.
This year, the Legislature passed a proposed constitutional amendment that would state that the Iowa Constitution does not secure a right to abortion. The language is intended to nullify the court's 2018 decision.
Lawmakers would have to agree on the same language in the 2023 or 2024 legislative session before the measure could appear on Iowa voters' ballots in 2024 for an up or down vote. If approved by a majority of Iowans, the language would then be added to the state's constitution.
More:Iowa Legislature approves anti-abortion constitutional amendment. Legislature must pass it again before it goes to voters.
Plaintiffs argued waiting period burdens fundamental rights
Planned Parenthood argued against both state waiting-period laws, saying such a delay is not just an inconvenience, but a possibly prohibitive obstacle for women who might need to travel a considerable distance not once but twice for appointments, perhaps need to take multiple days off work, or want to keep confidential that they are seeking an abortion.
"For many, many people, this is a delay of weeks, not days," Austen said.
In its 2018 ruling establishing a constitutional right to receive an abortion, the Supreme Court held that mandatory waiting periods have not been shown to persuade women not to go through with the procedure, but do impose medical, financial and logistical barriers upon women, especially in poor and minority populations. Turner's order Monday cited that precedent.
"The (72-hour waiting period law) takes no care to target patients who are uncertain when they present for their procedures but, instead, imposes blanket hardships upon all women,” then-Chief Justice Mark Cady wrote in 2018.
As the state readies its appeal of Turner's decision, four of the seven justices on the Iowa Supreme Court — including four of the five in the majority for the 2018 decision — have been replaced in the years since, all by justices appointed by Reynolds.
Despite that, Austen said the law's opponents believe the court will reach the same decision if the case is appealed.
"The way that legal precedent works is it is not supposed to change based on the decision-makers," she said.
View in new tab
William Morris covers courts for the Des Moines Register. He can be contacted at wrmorris2@registermedia.com, 715-573-8166 or on Twitter at @DMRMorris.
Careers Staff Directory Accessibility Site Map Legals Our Ethical Principles Terms of Service Privacy Policy Your California Privacy Rights / Privacy PolicyDo Not Sell My Info / Cookie Policy
Contact Us Support Local Business Advertise Your Business Advertising Terms and Conditions Licensing & Reprints Help Center Subscriber Guide My Account Give Feedback