Iowa Supreme Court hears arguments over 24-hour abortion waiting period

The state and advocates for abortion argued before the Iowa Supreme Court Wednesday whether it should overturn a District Court judge’s ruling on a state law requiring women to wait at least 24 hours before obtaining an abortion.

The state is asking the justices to overturn the permanent injunction on the 2020 law, and in doing so, also overturn a similar ruling on a 2018 case of a 72-hour waiting period that also affirmed women’s fundamental right to abortion under the Iowa Constitution.

But the opposing attorney argued the court should continue to block the 2020 law because state legislators violated legislative regulations when adding the measure as an amendment to an unrelated law and rushing it through the final hours of the session.

“The state wants this to be something it’s not,” said Rita Bettis Austen, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa representing Planned Parenthood of the Heartland. “Process is what this case is really about.”

In 2020, Gov. Kim Reynolds signed a law that stated women must wait at least 24 hours after an initial appointment in order to obtain an abortion. At that first appointment, patients would be given the opportunity to view an ultrasound of the fetus and receive information about other options, such as adoption.

Planned Parenthood sued Reynolds, the state and the Iowa Board of Medicine over the law, and a District Court judge issued a temporary injunction on the law before it could go into effect.

Last year, 6th Judicial District Court Judge Mitchell Turner permanently blocked the 2020 law after ruling it unconstitutional. In his ruling, Turner cited a 2018 Supreme Court decision that found women have a fundamental right to receive an abortion under the Iowa Constitution.

In his 2021 ruling, Turner stated the law could not be enforced because the Iowa Legislature violated the Iowa Constitution’s “single-subject rule” when lawmakers passed the measure as an amendment to a bill related to providing life-sustaining medical care to minors. The “single-subject rule” requires each law to address one main topic or issue.

Chief Justice Susan Christensen questioned the state’s attorneys on the nature of the measure’s passing as a last-minute amendment, asking whether the overnight vote deprived Iowans “of an opportunity to really be involved in that decision making.”

Assistant Attorney General Sam Langholz, who represented the state, denied violation of notice requirements, and argued legislators — who represent the people of Iowa — had a rigorous debate before the amendment passed in the early morning hours of June 15, 2020.

Attorneys for the state asked the state Supreme Court justices to overturn this ruling because the Constitution is “silent and therefore neutral on an issue like abortion.” Instead, this was a legislative issue that “should have been left to the Legislature,” Christopher Schandevel, a lawyer with the conservative group Alliance Defending Freedom, told the court.

Advocates for abortion have long argued waiting periods place an undue burden on Iowa women, especially those who are low income or face other barriers to access. Iowa currently has six clinics where women can receive medication-induced abortions, and only two can perform a medical procedure.

Waiting periods not only put undue burden on women, Bettis Austen argued, but also would cause delays that last longer than 24 hours due to provider resources and the reality of patients on the ground.

In addition, Bettis Austen said studies have shown waiting periods rarely cause women to change their mind on obtaining an abortion. She noted the state failed to present evidence to the court that contradict those findings.

Iowa law currently bans most abortions at 20 weeks.

This case is among several lawsuits brought before in recent years as Republican leaders have unsuccessfully attempted to limit abortion in the state. That includes the 2018 Supreme Court decision that permanently struck down the law requiring a 72-hour waiting period for abortion.

But since then, Reynolds has appointed more conservative justices to the state Supreme Court.

"The stakes in this case are higher than just this 24-hour waiting period. At risk are Iowans’ reproductive freedom to decide when and how to start or extend their family,“ Jamie Burch Elliott, director of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Iowa, told reporters during a news conference Wednesday afternoon.

This current lawsuit over an Iowa abortion case also comes as the rest of the nation prepares to hear the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on a separate abortion case, which is expected in June. Reynolds has called this case the “best opportunity yet” for the Supreme Court to overturn the landmark abortion rulings such as Roe v. Wade.

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, it would be up to individual states to determine abortion access for its residents. Given previous efforts from conservative leaders in Iowa, abortion activists say they anticipate overturning both the state and federal rulings would pave the way for the Republican-controlled Statehouse to take away abortion access entirely.

“At the beginning of this session, lawmakers stated that they did not intend to take any action on abortion-related bills until we had decisions from these two courts,” Burch Elliott said. “However, we have already seen anti-abortion measures move through the state legislatures. So I would anticipate some quick legislative action from Iowa lawmakers … if Roe v. Wade is overturned.”

Comments: (319) 398-8469; michaela.ramm@thegazette.com