Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al.
What's at Stake
The 桃子视频, the 桃子视频of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the law firm Covington & Burling LLP filed a lawsuit challenging several Ohio laws that together force abortion patients to wait a minimum of 24 hours after receiving unnecessary state-mandated information in person before they can access their desired abortion care. These laws violate Ohio鈥檚 constitutional right to reproductive freedom passed on November 7, 2023. Ohio is one of four states that have amended their constitutions to enshrine a fundamental right to abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court鈥檚 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women鈥檚 Health Organization.
Summary
The challenged abortion restrictions unnecessarily require the overwhelming majority of patients to make two trips to a health center and, in practice, often force patients to wait much longer than 24 hours to receive an abortion. This delays鈥攁nd in some cases, completely prevents 鈥攑atients from receiving an abortion. Under Ohio law, no other medical treatments or procedures that are similarly time-sensitive are subject to a legally-imposed waiting period or a requirement that a patient make a separate, in person visit to obtain state-mandated information prior to receiving care. The challenged abortion restrictions provide no health benefit and lack any medical justification. Rather, by unnecessarily delaying time-sensitive abortion care and forcing upon patients information that is often harmful, distressing, and stigmatizing, the laws only harm Ohioans鈥� health and well-being.
In August 2024, the court granted plaintiffs鈥� motion for a preliminary injunction, stopping the state from enforcing these restrictions as the case continues towards a final resolution on the merits. This is the first decision in a case challenging an abortion restriction under the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment to the Ohio Constitution, which took effect in December 2023.
The lawsuit was filed in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas on behalf of Preterm-Cleveland, Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, Women鈥檚 Med Group Professional Corporation, Northeast Ohio Women鈥檚 Center, and Dr. Catherine Romanos.
Legal Documents
-
03/29/2024
Complaint, Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al. -
03/29/2024
Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al. -
04/25/2024
Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for PI -
05/10/2024
Plaintiffs' Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction -
08/23/2024
Preliminary Injunction Decision -
03/17/2025
Plaintiffs' Proposed Supplemental Complaint -
02/09/2026
Defendants' Answer to Plaintiffs' Proposed Supplemental Complaint -
05/22/2026
Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment -
06/25/2026
Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgement -
07/17/2026
Plaintiffs' Reply ISO Summary Judgement
Date Filed: 03/29/2024
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 03/29/2024
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 04/25/2024
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 05/10/2024
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 08/23/2024
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 03/17/2025
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 02/09/2026
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 05/22/2026
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 06/25/2026
Affiliate: Ohio
Date Filed: 07/17/2026
Affiliate: Ohio
Press Releases
Ohio Judge Blocks Laws Mandating 24-Hour Waiting Period for Abortions for Violating Reproductive Freedom Amendment
Ohio Abortion Providers File Lawsuit Challenging 24-Hour Waiting Period and Other Abortion Restrictions