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

Planned Parenthood Association of Utah v. State of Utah
Utah Supreme Court
May 2023

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood Association of Utah v. State of Utah

This case involves a challenge to Utah Senate Bill (“S.B.”), a law that criminalizes nearly all abortions in Utah. In June 2022, Planned Parenthood Association of Utah (“PPAU”), one of only two abortion providers in the state, challenged S.B. 174 in Utah state court. It is currently litigating in the Utah Supreme Court to ensure the law remains blocked while courts consider the case. PPAU is represented in the appeal by the ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the Ƶof Utah, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the Utah law firm Zimmerman Booher. In August 2024, in a major win for Utahns, the Court affirmed the lower court order blocking SB 174. As a result, abortion remains legal in Utah until 18 weeks of pregnancy.
Explore case
Planned Parenthood Association Of Utah V. State Of Utah. Explore Case.
Utah Supreme Court
May 2023
Planned Parenthood Association of Utah v. State of Utah

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood Association of Utah v. State of Utah

This case involves a challenge to Utah Senate Bill (“S.B.”), a law that criminalizes nearly all abortions in Utah. In June 2022, Planned Parenthood Association of Utah (“PPAU”), one of only two abortion providers in the state, challenged S.B. 174 in Utah state court. It is currently litigating in the Utah Supreme Court to ensure the law remains blocked while courts consider the case. PPAU is represented in the appeal by the ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the Ƶof Utah, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the Utah law firm Zimmerman Booher. In August 2024, in a major win for Utahns, the Court affirmed the lower court order blocking SB 174. As a result, abortion remains legal in Utah until 18 weeks of pregnancy.
Planned Parenthood Association Of Utah V. State Of Utah. Explore Case.
Paul A. Isaacson, M.D., et al. v. Mark Brnovich, et al.
Arizona
Apr 2023

Reproductive Freedom

Paul A. Isaacson, M.D., et al. v. Mark Brnovich, et al.

Two Arizona physicians, the Arizona Medical Association, Arizona National Council of Jewish Women, and the Arizona National Organization of Women are challenging two abortion restrictions passed in Arizona in April 2021. One, the “reason” ban, is a ban on abortions based on a patient’s reason for seeking one, including when the abortion could be deemed due to a fetal condition or diagnosis. This ban targets pregnant people already facing complex considerations regarding fetal genetic conditions and drives a wedge between a patient and their provider.
Explore case
Paul A. Isaacson, M.d., Et Al. V. Mark Brnovich, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Arizona
Apr 2023
Paul A. Isaacson, M.D., et al. v. Mark Brnovich, et al.

Reproductive Freedom

Paul A. Isaacson, M.D., et al. v. Mark Brnovich, et al.

Two Arizona physicians, the Arizona Medical Association, Arizona National Council of Jewish Women, and the Arizona National Organization of Women are challenging two abortion restrictions passed in Arizona in April 2021. One, the “reason” ban, is a ban on abortions based on a patient’s reason for seeking one, including when the abortion could be deemed due to a fetal condition or diagnosis. This ban targets pregnant people already facing complex considerations regarding fetal genetic conditions and drives a wedge between a patient and their provider.
Paul A. Isaacson, M.d., Et Al. V. Mark Brnovich, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida, et al. v. State of Florida, et al.
Florida
Apr 2023

Reproductive Freedom

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.

Reproductive Freedom

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.
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al., v. Vanderhoff
Court Case
Apr 2023

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al., v. Vanderhoff

Explore case
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Et Al., V. Vanderhoff. Explore Case.
Court Case
Apr 2023
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al., v. Vanderhoff

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al., v. Vanderhoff

Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Et Al., V. Vanderhoff. Explore Case.
"Abortion Access" and "I heart Repro Rights" signs in front of Supreme Court
Kentucky
Apr 2023

Reproductive Freedom

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

Reproductive Freedom

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.
45
6
78...