吃瓜大本营

COLUMBUS, Ohio 鈥� In response to Ohio voters passing a state constitutional amendment to protect reproductive freedom, litigators in Preterm-Cleveland v. David Yost 鈥� the case challenging Ohio鈥檚 six-week abortion ban 鈥� issued the following statement:

鈥淥hioans have spoken loudly and clearly in favor of protecting the right to make decisions about their own bodies, without government interference. With the passage of Issue 1, the Ohio Constitution will explicitly protect the right to carry out one鈥檚 own reproductive decisions, including choosing to get an abortion, and prohibit anti-abortion politicians from enforcing laws like the six-week ban. While the Supreme Court of Ohio still has yet to rule on the two narrow questions it accepted in the case challenging the six-week ban, the direct question of whether the Ohio Constitution protects the right to abortion is not yet before the court. However, it is now abundantly clear that 鈥� if and when our case comes back before the Supreme Court 鈥� the court must honor the Ohio Constitution鈥檚 clear protections for abortion rights. We will continue fighting in Ohio courts to ensure that the will of Ohioans is respected, and that the six-week ban is permanently blocked once and for all.鈥�

The Supreme Court of Ohio is currently considering two limited questions in the six-week ban appeal: 1) whether the state government can immediately appeal a previously issued preliminary injunction order, rather than following the usual Ohio process of keeping a harmful law blocked until the case is decided, and 2) whether abortion providers can protect their patients鈥� right to abortion care by asserting those rights in challenging the ban 鈥� as has been accepted legal practice for half a century.