Americans United for Life (AUL) is pleased to share our 2024 Fourth Quarter Life Litigation Report. The report tracks major bioethics cases in federal and state courts across the country. These cases range from early life issues, such as abortion and in vitro fertilization, to end-of-life questions, such as assisted suicide. The goal of the report is to provide an overview of current trends in bioethics litigation and AUL’s legal and policy insights into courtroom battles over the human right to life. Here are some highlights of the report.
Supreme Court Updates
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, a case concerning Medicaid defunding of Planned Parenthood. The case turns upon a question of statutory interpretation: whether the Medicaid Act’s “choice of qualified provider” provision unambiguously confers upon a Medicaid beneficiary a private right to choose a specific provider. However, the case’s outcome will reach broader questions of the public funding of authentic women’s healthcare, as well as states’ police powers to safeguard woman and unborn children from the abortion industry.
The Court is considering whether to review two bubble zone cases, Turco v. City of Englewood, New Jersey and Coalition Life v. City of Carbondale, Illinois. Both cases challenge the Supreme Court’s 2000 decision in Hill v. Colorado, which upheld a law that prohibited sidewalk counselors from approaching or counseling a woman within an 8-foot floating bubble zone around her if she is within 100 feet of an abortion facility, even though the woman is on a public sidewalk. The cases raise issues about the First Amendment and women’s informed consent counseling about life-affirming pregnancy options.
A petition for a writ of certiorari is pending in the Supreme Court in Oklahoma v. Health and Human Services. Oklahoma sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services after the agency suspended the state’s Title X funding because Oklahoma objected to providing abortion referrals. The petition presents issues involving the Spending Clause and conscience protections under the Weldon Amendment.
EMTALA Litigation Continues
Litigation continues over whether the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) contains an abortion mandate. Last year in Moyle v. United States, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for a writ of certiorari as improvidently granted. However, the case has returned to the Ninth Circuit, restyled as United States v. State of Idaho. The Ninth Circuit heard oral argument in December.
Catholic Benefits Association also has challenged the EMTALA abortion mandate in Catholic Benefits Association v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The case is at the pleadings stage in the Middle District of Tennessee.
The District of Idaho also is considering an anti-life lawsuit to enforce the EMTALA abortion mandate in St. Luke’s Health System, LTD v. Labrador. The case is still at the pleadings stage.
State Court Litigation
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, many abortion activists voluntarily dismissed their litigation in federal courts since Dobbs had mooted their underlying theories of a violation of a purported federal abortion right. Consequently, abortion activists filed new challenges in state courts to contrive state constitutional rights to abortion. Many of these cases are ongoing, but there are also challenges brought under new state constitutional amendments that protect abortion as a right.
Parties are briefing the Georgia Supreme Court and North Dakota Supreme Court, respectively, over whether the state constitution protects abortion in State of Georgia v. SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective and Access Independent Health Services, Inc., d/b/a Red River Women’s Health Clinic v. Wrigley.
The New Mexico Supreme Court avoided the state constitutional question in State of New Mexico ex rel. Raul Torrez v. Board of County Commissioners for Lea County. Instead, the court determined that state statutes preempted certain pro-life ordinances.
State courts in Michigan and Missouri are grappling with the extent of the ballot initiatives that amended their states constitutions to protect abortion as a right. Abortion activists have challenged a variety of pro-life protections in those states, including health and safety laws and informed consent provisions, in Northland Family Planning Center v. Nessel and Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains v. State of Missouri.
Assisted Suicide Litigation
Disability rights advocates have appealed the dismissal of their case that challenges California’s End of Life Option Act as unlawfully discriminating against persons with disabilities under the Americans With Disabilities Act in United Spinal Association v. State of California. The Ninth Circuit will hear oral argument in the case in March.
Parties are currently briefing the Third Circuit in Govatos v. Murphy. The case had challenged New Jersey’s assisted suicide residency requirements under the Privileges and Immunities, Commerce, and Equal Protection Clauses, but the district court had granted the State’s motion to dismiss.
Please reach out if you have any questions regarding the report or to notify us of bioethics litigation to add to our case list.
