October 2020
Despite the significant June 2020 legal victory for abortion rights, striking down Louisiana’s unconstitutional admitting-privileges law in June Medical Services v. Russo, federal courts across the country are hearing additional legal challenges to safe and legal abortion-access established 47 years ago in Roe v. Wade. Notably, in the 7th District Court of Appeals, Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett joined two dissents that strongly opposed abortion rights.
In 2020 alone, 394 bills have been introduced in state legislatures to ban or severely restrict access to abortion. The 17 cases cited below are one step away from the U.S. Supreme Court. These relentless attacks on access to reproductive health care are especially egregious during a pandemic when there is an acute need for these services.
4th Circuit Court of Appeals cases
1. Amy Bryant, et al. v. Jim Woodall, et al., No. 19-1685
o Description: Challenge to a North Carolina twenty-week abortion ban.
2. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists et al. v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration et al., Nos. 20-1824; 20-1970
o Description: Challenge to the FDA’s nationwide Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) requirement that mifepristone be dispensed in-person at a health center during the COVID-19 pandemic.
3. Planned Parenthood of Maryland, Inc. et al. v. Alex M. Azar II et al., No. 20-2006
o Description: Challenge to the Trump administration’s nationwide separate-billing rule, which forces insurers offering state exchange plans with abortion coverage to bill consumers separately for abortion services.
5th Circuit Court of Appeals cases
4. Stephen Russo v. Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast et al., No. 18-30699
o Description: Challenges to Louisiana’s inaction on Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast’s application for an abortion license at its New Orleans health center and an attempt by politicians to force Planned Parenthood out of the state’s Medicaid program.
5. Jackson Women´s Health Organization et al. v. Thomas Dobbs et al., No. 18-60868
o Description: Challenge to a Mississippi fifteen-week abortion ban.
6. Whole Woman’s Health et al. v. Ken Paxton et al., No. 17-51060
o Description: Challenge to a Texas law that bans the use of the dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion procedure, the most common abortion procedure used after sixteen weeks of pregnancy.
7. Whole Woman’s Health et al. v. Charles Smith, No. 18-50730
o Description: Challenge to a Texas law designed to stigmatize abortion and shame patients who seek abortion services by requiring fetal tissue to be buried or cremated. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals cases
8. EMW Women’s Surgical Center et al. v. Adam Meier et al., No. 18-6161
o Description: Challenge to medically unnecessary Kentucky laws that require abortion providers maintain written transfer agreements with a local hospital and a transport agreement with ambulance services.
9. Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio et al. v. Amy Acton et al., No. 18-3329
o Description: Challenge to an Ohio law banning abortions if a provider learns the reason for seeking abortion services is a diagnosis of Down syndrome, a stigmatizing law that does nothing to address the serious health care disparities people with disabilities face.
10. Memphis Center for Reproductive Health et al. v. Herbert H. Slatery III et al., No. 20-5969 o Description: Challenge to a broad Tennessee law that:
i. Bans abortion at six, eight, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20- 24 weeks of pregnancy
1. The six-week ban takes effect first; if that ban is found unconstitutional, the eight-week ban takes effect; if the eight-week ban is found unconstitutional, the 10-week ban takes effect; and so on.
ii. Bans abortion if a provider learns the reason for seeking abortion services is based on the fetus’s sex or race, or diagnosis of Down syndrome.
7th Circuit Court of Appeals cases
(Judge Amy Coney Barrett joined the far-right dissent in both of these cases.)
11. Planned Parenthood of Indiana & Kentucky, Inc. v. Kristina Box et al., No. 17-2428
o Description: Challenge to Indiana law putting minors in harm’s way by requiring parents of minors who have already been adjudged mature enough to have an abortion on their own to notify a parent before they can obtain an abortion.
12. Planned Parenthood of Indiana & Kentucky, Inc. v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health et al., No. 20-2407
o Description: Challenge to Indiana law requiring physicians to report “all abortion complications,” of which many are confusing, vague, or completely normal and not threatening to the health of the patient.
8th Circuit Court of Appeals cases
13. Frederick W. Hopkins v. Larry Jegley et al., No. 17-2879
o Description: Challenge to four Arkansas abortion restrictions, including a ban on the use of the D&E procedure, the most common abortion procedure used after sixteen weeks of pregnancy.
14. Little Rock Family Planning Services et al. v. Leslie Rutledge et al., No. 19-2690
o Description: Challenge to three Arkansas abortion restrictions:
i. An eight-week abortion ban
ii. A ban on abortion if a provider learns the reason for seeking abortion services is because a diagnosis of Down syndrome
iii. A requirement that all abortion providers be board-certified or board-eligible OB-GYNs
15. Reproductive Health Services et al. v. Michael Parson et al., No. 19-2882
o Description: Challenge to a Missouri law that:
i. Bans abortions after eight, 14, 18, and 20 weeks of pregnancy
1.The eight-week ban takes effect first; if that ban is found unconstitutional, the fourteen-week ban takes effect; if the fourteen-week ban is found unconstitutional, the 18-week ban takes effect; and so on.
ii. Bans abortion if a provider learns the reason for seeking abortion services is based on the fetus’s sex or race, or diagnosis of Down syndrome.
11th Circuit Court of Appeals cases
16. Reproductive Health Services et al. v. Daryl Bailey et al., No. 17-13561
o Description: Challenge to part of an Alabama parental-consent law requiring that the court allow the district attorney and minor’s parents to participate in judicial bypass proceedings, putting minors in an abusive household at risk.
17. SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective et al. v. Brian Kemp et al., No. 20-13024-G
o Description: Challenge to a Georgia six-week abortion ban.