Iowa Asks State Supreme Court to Let Blocked Abortion Law Go into Effect

In a significant development, the state of Iowa has requested the state Supreme Court to allow the enforcement of its contested abortion law, challenging claims from abortion providers that it violates women's rights to exercise bodily autonomy. The law, which prohibits most abortions after approximately six weeks of pregnancy, was briefly enforced last July before being halted by a district court judge to assess its constitutionality. Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds appealed the decision with the state Supreme Court’s permission. As the legal battle continues, abortion remains legal in Iowa up to 20 weeks of pregnancy while the new law is on hold.

The law was passed with exclusive Republican support during a one-day special session, leading to a legal challenge filed by the ACLU of Iowa, Planned Parenthood North Central States, and the Emma Goldman Clinic. This move aligns with the trend in most Republican-led states which have imposed restrictions on abortion following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Currently, 14 states have almost complete bans on abortion at all stages of pregnancy. Adding to this, Arizona recently joined this group as its Supreme Court upheld a long-dormant law that prohibits nearly all abortions, without exceptions for rape or incest.

Legal Battle in Iowa

The recent hearing in Iowa marks the latest chapter in a prolonged legal battle over abortion restrictions in the state. The state Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision by the end of its term in June, with the possibility of the issue not reaching its conclusion at that point. A key aspect that remains unresolved is whether earlier rulings that applied an “undue burden test” for abortion laws are still applicable. This test serves as an intermediate level of scrutiny, ensuring that laws do not pose a significant obstacle to abortion.

During the hearing, Planned Parenthood attorney Peter Im emphasized the court’s role in protecting individual rights, bodily autonomy, and Iowans’ rights to exercise dominion over their own bodies. Conversely, the state argued that the law should be analyzed using rational basis review, the lowest level of scrutiny in legal challenges. Eric Wessan, representing the state, stressed the importance of the state Supreme Court definitively stating its position after years of litigation.

The court may decide to lift the temporary pause without ruling on the law's constitutionality or the standard to use in assessing it. This could lead to the case being sent back to lower courts for comprehensive arguments. Notably, Governor Reynolds had previously called lawmakers back to Des Moines in July, following the Supreme Court's decision not to reinstate a blocked 2018 law that resembled the new one. However, a rare 3-3 decision left the block intact due to a justice's recusal.

Wessan referenced the Iowa Supreme Court’s 2022 reversal during the recent arguments, pointing out that the court had previously ruled that there is no “fundamental right” to abortion in the state constitution. This stance is crucial in shaping the ongoing legal battle in Iowa.

Notably, the Iowa law allows for abortion after six weeks of pregnancy in limited circumstances, such as in cases of rape or incest if reported within specific timelines, or if the pregnancy endangers the woman's life. Additionally, the state's medical board has established rules for doctors to adhere to the law, adding a layer of complexity to the ongoing debate.