Reproductive Freedom

Featured

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

Reproductive Freedom

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 2023
Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

Reproductive Freedom

Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

The Ƶ joined over 200 reproductive health, rights, and justice organizations in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of an emergency request to stay a decision issued by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that severely restricted the use of mifepristone — a medication used in most abortions in this country — and threatened the innovation of new drugs and the ability of Americans to access lifesaving drugs.
Danco Laboratories, Llc, V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine; U.s. Fda V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2022
Bans Off Our Bodies Protest Sign

Reproductive Freedom

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.

Reproductive Freedom

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

Reproductive Freedom

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

121 Reproductive Freedom Cases

Silver State Hope Fund v. Nevada Department of Health and Human Services
Nevada
Sep 2024

Reproductive Freedom

Silver State Hope Fund v. Nevada Department of Health and Human Services

Silver State Hope Fund, the Ƶ, and the Ƶof Nevada prevailed in their challenge to Nevada’s ban on Medicaid coverage for abortion as sex-based discrimination in violation of the state constitution's Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Filed in September 2024, the court's written order — which is not subject to additional challenge — concludes the case and requires the state’s Medicaid program to cover abortion care. Following this ruling, the state will begin to take steps to extend coverage to abortion. The case was the first legal challenge under the ERA, which Nevada voters overwhelmingly approved in 2022. Nevada joins 18 other states that cover abortion under their state Medicaid program.
Explore case
Silver State Hope Fund V. Nevada Department Of Health And Human Services. Explore Case.
Nevada
Sep 2024
Silver State Hope Fund v. Nevada Department of Health and Human Services

Reproductive Freedom

Silver State Hope Fund v. Nevada Department of Health and Human Services

Silver State Hope Fund, the Ƶ, and the Ƶof Nevada prevailed in their challenge to Nevada’s ban on Medicaid coverage for abortion as sex-based discrimination in violation of the state constitution's Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Filed in September 2024, the court's written order — which is not subject to additional challenge — concludes the case and requires the state’s Medicaid program to cover abortion care. Following this ruling, the state will begin to take steps to extend coverage to abortion. The case was the first legal challenge under the ERA, which Nevada voters overwhelmingly approved in 2022. Nevada joins 18 other states that cover abortion under their state Medicaid program.
Silver State Hope Fund V. Nevada Department Of Health And Human Services. Explore Case.
Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al.
Ohio
Aug 2024

Reproductive Freedom

Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al.

The Ƶ, the Ƶof 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’s 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’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
Explore case
Preterm-cleveland, Et Al, V. Dave Yost, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Ohio
Aug 2024
Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al.

Reproductive Freedom

Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al.

The Ƶ, the Ƶof 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’s 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’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
Preterm-cleveland, Et Al, V. Dave Yost, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Gonzalez v. Ramirez et al.
Texas
Jun 2024

Reproductive Freedom

+3 Ƶ

Gonzalez v. Ramirez et al.

Although Texas law clearly prohibits prosecuting people for terminating their pregnancies, Starr County officials indicted, arrested, and jailed Lizelle Gonzalez for having an abortion. The ACLU’s Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative and Criminal Law Reform Project, alongside the Ƶof Texas and south Texas firm Garza Martinez, are representing Ms. Gonzalez in a lawsuit against Starr County and local officials based on violations of Ms. Gonzalez’s constitutional rights.
Explore case
Gonzalez V. Ramirez Et Al.. Explore Case.
Texas
Jun 2024
Gonzalez v. Ramirez et al.

Reproductive Freedom

+3 Ƶ

Gonzalez v. Ramirez et al.

Although Texas law clearly prohibits prosecuting people for terminating their pregnancies, Starr County officials indicted, arrested, and jailed Lizelle Gonzalez for having an abortion. The ACLU’s Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative and Criminal Law Reform Project, alongside the Ƶof Texas and south Texas firm Garza Martinez, are representing Ms. Gonzalez in a lawsuit against Starr County and local officials based on violations of Ms. Gonzalez’s constitutional rights.
Gonzalez V. Ramirez Et Al.. Explore Case.
Moira Akers v. State
Maryland Supreme Court
Jun 2024

Reproductive Freedom

Moira Akers v. State

This case concerns whether prosecutors can admit evidence that a person exercised their right to decide whether to terminate their pregnancy as proof of intent for murder. Here, the prosecution’s use of this evidence at Moira Akers’ trial denied her due process, resulting in an unjust conviction and a 30-year prison term. The ACLU’s Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative, alongside the Ƶof Maryland, filed an amicus brief arguing that allowing admission of this evidence not only violated Ms. Akers’ rights but chills the right of all Marylanders to freely decide whether to continue or end their pregnancies. The Maryland Supreme Court issued a ruling on February 19th, 2025 overturning Moira Akers’ conviction on the grounds of inadmissible evidence.
Explore case
Moira Akers V. State. Explore Case.
Maryland Supreme Court
Jun 2024
Moira Akers v. State

Reproductive Freedom

Moira Akers v. State

This case concerns whether prosecutors can admit evidence that a person exercised their right to decide whether to terminate their pregnancy as proof of intent for murder. Here, the prosecution’s use of this evidence at Moira Akers’ trial denied her due process, resulting in an unjust conviction and a 30-year prison term. The ACLU’s Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative, alongside the Ƶof Maryland, filed an amicus brief arguing that allowing admission of this evidence not only violated Ms. Akers’ rights but chills the right of all Marylanders to freely decide whether to continue or end their pregnancies. The Maryland Supreme Court issued a ruling on February 19th, 2025 overturning Moira Akers’ conviction on the grounds of inadmissible evidence.
Moira Akers V. State. Explore Case.
Women's Medical Group Professional Corp. v. Vanderhoff
Ohio
May 2024

Reproductive Freedom

Women's Medical Group Professional Corp. v. Vanderhoff

Ohio clinics must maintain an ambulatory surgical facility license to provide procedural abortion. Ohio imposes medically unnecessary and burdensome licensing requirements that make it difficult, if not impossible, for abortion clinics to maintain their licenses.
Explore case
Women's Medical Group Professional Corp. V. Vanderhoff. Explore Case.
Ohio
May 2024
Women's Medical Group Professional Corp. v. Vanderhoff

Reproductive Freedom

Women's Medical Group Professional Corp. v. Vanderhoff

Ohio clinics must maintain an ambulatory surgical facility license to provide procedural abortion. Ohio imposes medically unnecessary and burdensome licensing requirements that make it difficult, if not impossible, for abortion clinics to maintain their licenses.
Women's Medical Group Professional Corp. V. Vanderhoff. Explore Case.
23
4
56...