A ruling by a district judge in North Dakota on Thursday has invalidated the statewide prohibition on abortion, deeming it a violation of the Constitution. Judge Bruce Romanick articulated in his decision that the prohibition is “unconstitutionally void for vagueness.” He emphasized that “pregnant women in North Dakota have a fundamental right to choose abortion before viability exists.” This decision comes in response to a legal challenge from 2022, initiated by an abortion clinic and healthcare providers, aiming to overturn the statute.
“The abortion statutes at issue in this case infringe on a woman’s fundamental right to procreative autonomy, and are not narrowly tailored to promote women’s health or to protect unborn human life,” the ruling states. “The law as currently drafted takes away a woman’s liberty and her right to pursue and obtain safety and happiness. The law also impermissibly infringes on the constitutional rights for victims of crimes.”
The contested legislation prohibits the performance of abortions in the wake of rape or incest incidents, and it also restricts the procedure beyond six weeks gestational age. However, it does include a provision that permits abortions when they are “deemed necessary based on reasonable medical judgment which was intended to prevent the death or a serious health risk to the pregnant female.”
“All North Dakota citizens, including women, have the right to make fundamental, appropriate, and informed medical decisions in consultation with a physician and to receive their chosen medical care among comparable alternatives,” the ruling states. “Such a choice is a fundamental one, central to personal autonomy and self-determination. Those choices belong to the individual, not the government. That is the essence of what liberty and happiness requires.”
Meanwhile, a similar judgment was handed down by an Alaska Superior Court judge the previous week, striking down a state regulation that mandated abortions be performed solely by physicians accredited by the State Medical Board, citing a conflict with components of the state constitution.
