A District Court Judge denied a Request by the State Thursday, to Suspend His Decision striking down the State’s Abortion Ban. while the Case goes to the North Dakota Supreme Court for Appeal.
“It would be nonsensical for this Court to keep a law it has found to be unconstitutional in effect pending appeal,” South Central Judicial District Court Judge Bruce Romanick wrote in the Order. Romanick filed the Order within hours of hearing Arguments on the State’s request.
In the Hearing, Special Assistant Attorney General Daniel Gaustad argued it would be prudent for Romanick to wait for the High Court to weigh in before Disrupting the Status Quo. “It requires four or five justices to declare this statute unconstitutional — not, respectfully, one district court judge,” Gaustad said during the Hearing in Burleigh County.
The Ban, enacted by the Legislature in 2023, made Abortion Illegal in All Cases except Rape or Incest, if the Mother has been Pregnant for less than six weeks, or when the Pregnancy poses a serious Physical Health Threat.
A group of Reproductive Health Care Doctors and an Abortion Clinic last year filed Suit to Challenge the Ban, arguing the Law infringes on Individual Rights and puts Health Care Providers in danger by Not making it clear when an Abortion may be performed for Health reasons.
Romanick last month sided with the Plaintiffs, finding the Law “unconstitutionally void for vagueness” and declaring that “pregnant women in North Dakota have a fundamental right to choose abortion before viability exists.”
Gaustad argued that this Standard goes far beyond the Precedent set by the North Dakota Supreme Court in 2023. When it Ruled last year that North Dakota’s previous Abortion Ban was Unconstitutional, the State Supreme Court found that North Dakotans have a Right to access Abortion for Health reasons.
Gaustad also claimed that, because there’s No Clear definition for Fetal Viability, leaving the Decision in place could create Confusion for Health Care Workers. “I think there’s confusion no matter how I rule here today,” Romanick replied.
Melissa Rutman, an Attorney representing the Plaintiffs, said putting the Ruling on Hold would ignore Romanick’s own Finding that the Law does Not set a clear Standard for what counts as a serious Health Risk, thereby putting Doctors at Risk for Prosecution and Restricting Pregnant Mothers’ access to necessary Health Care.
“The public interest is in access to life- and health-preserving care, not in prosecuting doctors for providing emergency medical care,” Rutman said.
Romanick said the possibility that the Supreme Court could ultimately Disagree with His Ruling doesn’t mean He should Suspend His own Decision. “I’ve been doing this a long time, and I’ve been reversed by the Supreme Court, I understand that — that’s how the world works,” Romanick said. “I do my best work, my best job, and then they have to review that.”
Romanick noted that the State could still ask the Supreme Court to put His Ruling on Hhold while it hears the State’s Appeal. The State has Not yet Filed its Appeal.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment