Abortion

Featured

U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States

Abortion

Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States

Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by Idaho politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute — the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) — and put doctors in jail for providing pregnant patients necessary emergency medical care. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this case on April 24, 2024. The Court’s ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
Idaho And Moyle, Et Al. V. United States. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2022
Bans Off Our Bodies Protest Sign

Abortion

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization

The case concerns the constitutionality of a Mississippi law prohibiting abortions after the fifteenth week of pregnancy. The state used the case as a vehicle to ask the Supreme Court to take away the federal constitutional right to abortion it first recognized 50 years before in Roe v. Wade. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States accepted the state’s invitation and overturned Roe eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion.
Dobbs V. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
RFP attorneys Alexa Kolbi-Molinas and Andrew Beck heading towards the Supreme Court to argue the case.

Abortion

Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center

In 2018, the Ƶ and the Ƶof Kentucky filed a suit on behalf of Kentucky abortion providers and their patients challenging a state law banning physicians from providing a safe and medically proven abortion method called dilation and evacuation, or “D&E.” If it were to take effect, this law would prevent many patients from being able to obtain an abortion altogether. After two courts held that the law is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled in March 2022 that Kentucky Attorney General Cameron can continue his pursuit to push abortion out of reach by intervening in the underlying challenge to an abortion ban, which is proceeding in a lower court.
Cameron V. Emw Women’s Surgical Center. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson

Abortion

Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson

The Ƶ, the Ƶof Texas, and coalition partners filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers and funds on July 13, 2021, challenging S.B. 8, a Texas law allowing private citizens to enforce a ban on abortion as early as six weeks in pregnancy—before many know they are pregnant. The ACLU’s challenge made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court three times in as many months. After hearing oral arguments in the case, the Court issued a decision on December 10, 2021, that ended the most promising pathways to blocking the ban. The Supreme Court’s decision makes it more difficult to obtain adequate relief from the courts and gives states the green light to ban abortion using bounty-hunting schemes. Texas’ abortion ban will remain in effect until relief can be secured from a court.
Whole Woman's Health V. Jackson. Explore Case.

All Cases

93 Abortion Cases

Raidoo et al. v. Camacho et al.
Court Case
Nov 2023

Abortion

Raidoo et al. v. Camacho et al.

The Ƶis challenging two Guam laws that are blocking access to abortion on the island.
Explore case
Raidoo Et Al. V. Camacho Et Al.. Explore Case.
Court Case
Nov 2023
Raidoo et al. v. Camacho et al.

Abortion

Raidoo et al. v. Camacho et al.

The Ƶis challenging two Guam laws that are blocking access to abortion on the island.
Raidoo Et Al. V. Camacho Et Al.. Explore Case.
EMW Women's Surgical Center, P.S.C., et al. v. Daniel Cameron, et. al.
Court Case
Jun 2023

Abortion

EMW Women's Surgical Center, P.S.C., et al. v. Daniel Cameron, et. al.

Immediately following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, the Ƶ, Ƶof Kentucky, and coalition partners filed a state court lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers challenging two Kentucky laws that collectively eliminate access to abortion in the Commonwealth. The case was dismissed without prejudice after the Kentucky Supreme Court held that the abortion provider plaintiffs could not assert the constitutional rights to privacy and self-determination on behalf of their patients. The Court left open the door for Kentuckians seeking abortion to assert their own constitutional rights.
Explore case
Emw Women's Surgical Center, P.s.c., Et Al. V. Daniel Cameron, Et. Al.. Explore Case.
Court Case
Jun 2023
EMW Women's Surgical Center, P.S.C., et al. v. Daniel Cameron, et. al.

Abortion

EMW Women's Surgical Center, P.S.C., et al. v. Daniel Cameron, et. al.

Immediately following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, the Ƶ, Ƶof Kentucky, and coalition partners filed a state court lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers challenging two Kentucky laws that collectively eliminate access to abortion in the Commonwealth. The case was dismissed without prejudice after the Kentucky Supreme Court held that the abortion provider plaintiffs could not assert the constitutional rights to privacy and self-determination on behalf of their patients. The Court left open the door for Kentuckians seeking abortion to assert their own constitutional rights.
Emw Women's Surgical Center, P.s.c., Et Al. V. Daniel Cameron, Et. Al.. Explore Case.
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. Stein
North Carolina
Jun 2023

Abortion

Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. Stein

North Carolina health care providers filed a lawsuit on June 16, 2023 challenging several provisions in Senate Bill 20, a sweeping law that severely restricts access to abortion from the earliest stages of pregnancy and bans care after 12 weeks in nearly all circumstances. The case was filed one month after the North Carolina General Assembly rushed S.B. 20 through both chambers and overrode a veto from Gov. Roy Cooper to put it into law. The law — which was drafted and passed without any opportunity to amend — is scheduled to take effect on July 1.
Explore case
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic V. Stein. Explore Case.
North Carolina
Jun 2023
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. Stein

Abortion

Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. Stein

North Carolina health care providers filed a lawsuit on June 16, 2023 challenging several provisions in Senate Bill 20, a sweeping law that severely restricts access to abortion from the earliest stages of pregnancy and bans care after 12 weeks in nearly all circumstances. The case was filed one month after the North Carolina General Assembly rushed S.B. 20 through both chambers and overrode a veto from Gov. Roy Cooper to put it into law. The law — which was drafted and passed without any opportunity to amend — is scheduled to take effect on July 1.
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic V. Stein. Explore Case.
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida, et al. v. State of Florida, et al.
Florida
Apr 2023

Abortion

Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida, et al. v. State of Florida, et al.

On January 23, 2023, the Florida Supreme Court accepted a request by abortion providers to hear arguments in their case against House Bill 5 (HB 5), a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy that threatens to put doctors in jail for providing essential care beyond that point. The move comes after several court rulings closed off meaningful legal avenues to block the law. While providers’ request for the court to hear arguments in the case was granted, the justices declined to immediately block HB 5 while the lawsuit proceeds, leaving the ban in place for now.
Explore case
Planned Parenthood Of Southwest And Central Florida, Et Al. V. State Of Florida, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Florida
Apr 2023
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida, et al. v. State of Florida, et al.

Abortion

Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida, et al. v. State of Florida, et al.

On January 23, 2023, the Florida Supreme Court accepted a request by abortion providers to hear arguments in their case against House Bill 5 (HB 5), a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy that threatens to put doctors in jail for providing essential care beyond that point. The move comes after several court rulings closed off meaningful legal avenues to block the law. While providers’ request for the court to hear arguments in the case was granted, the justices declined to immediately block HB 5 while the lawsuit proceeds, leaving the ban in place for now.
Planned Parenthood Of Southwest And Central Florida, Et Al. V. State Of Florida, Et Al.. Explore Case.
"Abortion Access" and "I heart Repro Rights" signs in front of Supreme Court
Kentucky
Apr 2023

Abortion

EMW v. Meier (formerly EMW v. Glisson)

The Ƶand attorneys at Lynch, Cox, Gilman & Goodman P.S.C. filed the federal lawsuit aimed at blocking unnecessary and unconstitutional state laws to prevent the closure of the state's only abortion clinic, EMW Women's Surgical Center. In March 2017, the state threatened to revoke the clinic's license, alleging that the clinic’s agreements with a hospital and ambulance service contained technical deficiencies, even though the state approved those same agreements in renewing EMW’s license in 2016. Based on these alleged deficiencies, the state claimed that EMW was not incompliance with state law requiring abortion providers to have a transfer agreement with a local hospital and a transport agreement with an ambulance service.
Explore case
Emw V. Meier (formerly Emw V. Glisson). Explore Case.
Kentucky
Apr 2023
"Abortion Access" and "I heart Repro Rights" signs in front of Supreme Court

Abortion

EMW v. Meier (formerly EMW v. Glisson)

The Ƶand attorneys at Lynch, Cox, Gilman & Goodman P.S.C. filed the federal lawsuit aimed at blocking unnecessary and unconstitutional state laws to prevent the closure of the state's only abortion clinic, EMW Women's Surgical Center. In March 2017, the state threatened to revoke the clinic's license, alleging that the clinic’s agreements with a hospital and ambulance service contained technical deficiencies, even though the state approved those same agreements in renewing EMW’s license in 2016. Based on these alleged deficiencies, the state claimed that EMW was not incompliance with state law requiring abortion providers to have a transfer agreement with a local hospital and a transport agreement with an ambulance service.
Emw V. Meier (formerly Emw V. Glisson). Explore Case.
23
4
56...