Judge strikes down many of Minnesota’s abortion restrictions

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — A judge declared many of Minnesota’s restrictions on abortion unconstitutional on Monday, including the state’s mandatory 24-hour waiting period and a requirement that both parents be notified before a minor can get an abortion.

Ramsey County District Judge Thomas Gilligan also struck down Minnesota’s requirements that only physicians can perform abortions and that abortions after the first trimester must be performed in hospitals. His order took effect immediately, meaning the limits can’t be enforced.

Gilligan ruled in a lawsuit by Gender Justice and other abortion rights supporters, which argued successfully that the restrictions were unconstitutional under a landmark 1995 Minnesota Supreme Court ruling known as Doe v. Gomez, which held that the state constitution protects abortion rights. The judge called that case “significant and historic” and said it’s unaffected by the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

“These abortion laws violate the right to privacy because they infringe upon the fundamental right under the Minnesota Constitution to access abortion care and do not withstand strict scrutiny,” Gilligan wrote.

Physicians were required at the start of the 24-hour waiting period to provide information to the patient about the risks of the procedure, the probable gestational age of the fetus, the risks of carrying the pregnancy to term, and fetal pain. The laws also required disclosure about welfare benefits that might be available for prenatal care, childbirth and neonatal care, and that the father would be liable for child support.

Opponents of abortion rights condemned the decision. Speaking to reporters, Republican attorney general candidate Jim Schultz called on Democratic Attorney General Keith Ellison to appeal the ruling and accused him of doing too little to defend the laws, which were adopted by the Legislature.

While Ellison is an abortion rights supporter, he acknowledged previously that his office had an obligation to defend the restrictions.

“My team and I are reviewing the 140-page decision and are beginning to consult with our clients about any next steps,” the attorney general said in a statement. “It’s clear Judge Gilligan, who has had this case for three years, has put much thought into this decision that he clearly did not take lightly.”

The state’s largest anti-abortion group, Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, also condemned the ruling.

“The laws challenged in this case are common sense measures that support and empower pregnant women,” MCCL said in a statement. “Today’s ruling striking them down is extreme and without a foundation in the Minnesota Constitution. It blocks Minnesotans from enacting reasonable protections for unborn children and their mothers.”

But groups behind the lawsuit said the ruling will benefit patients from other states that have already banned or are expected to restrict access to abortion in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court decision and are now expected to come to Minnesota.

“With abortion bans in half the country set to take effect in the coming weeks and months, it is more important than ever to leverage protections in state constitutions like Minnesota’s,” Amanda Allen, senior counsel and director at the Lawyering Project, said in a statement. “Minnesota has the chance to be a safe place for people amidst this national public health crisis.”