Georgia's Law Against Abortion Hit With Preliminary Injunction
"In light of binding precedent, the Court determines that Plaintiffs have met their burden for the issuance of a preliminary injunction," Judge Steve Jones said in a 47-page order Tuesday. "Plaintiffs have also shown that, absent a preliminary injunction, they will suffer irreparable harm. By banning pre-viability abortions, H.B. 481 violates the constitutional right to privacy."
October 01, 2019 at 04:58 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Daily Report
A federal judge has temporarily blocked enforcement of a new Georgia law against abortion while the constitutional challenge is pending.
Judge Steve Jones of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday against House Bill 481, which outlaws abortion upon detection of an embrionic pulse. The statute says it could apply as early as six weeks into pregnancy and carries an effective date of Jan. 1, 2020.
"In light of binding precedent, the Court determines that Plaintiffs have met their burden for the issuance of a preliminary injunction," Jones said in a 47-page order posted Tuesday afternoon. "Plaintiffs have also shown that, absent a preliminary injunction, they will suffer irreparable harm. By banning pre-viability abortions, H.B. 481 violates the constitutional right to privacy, which, in turn, inflicts per se irreparable harm on Plaintiffs."
Plaintiffs' attorney and ACLU Georgia Legal Director Sean J. Young said he received notice of the order at 3:21 p.m.
"Georgia's ban on abortion has always been blatantly unconstitutional, and all the federal court did today was uphold and defend the Constitution," Young said. "The most important thing is that HB 481 is not going into effect this January because of this order."
SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective and other advocacy and medical care providers sued Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Attorney General Chris Carr and prosecutors around the state seeking to block enforcement of the law, also asking the judge to temporarily enjoin enforcement of the law while the litigation proceeds.
"We are currently reviewing Judge Jones' decision," Kemp said Tuesday through communications director and deputy executive counsel Candice Broce. "Despite today's outcome, we remain confident in our position. We will continue to fight for the unborn and work to ensure that all Georgians have the opportunity to live, grow, and prosper."
Jones also issued a scheduling order, saying the case is on a four-month discovery track, ending Jan. 18, 2020. Jones said during a hearing last Monday that he expected to schedule the case for trial early next year—unless the parties agree to an expedited schedule.
Jones held a two-hour hearing on the case Sept. 23. Activists challenging the law sought the temporary injunction. The state argued that no injunction was necessary because the case can be decided before the law takes effect Jan. 1.
Supporters of abortion bans in Georgia and other states have said their hope is that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear their appeals and overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision affirming a woman's right to choose whether to continue a pregnancy up until the point of viability—when a baby could survive after birth.
Among other things, lawyers for the two sides have argued over whether the law is a ban, since it allows the procedure before the detection of an embryonic pulse and after in certain cases of rape or threat of death for the mother.
"H.B. 481 is an abortion ban from top to bottom," Young said. "Judge Jones saw it for what it is."
The case is SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective v. Brian Kemp, Civil Action No.: 1:19-cv-02973-SCJ.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readAm Law 200 Firm to Defend PUMA in Latest Quarrel Over Patented Shoe Technology
Apple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
Who Got the Work: 16 Lawyers Appointed to BioLab Class Action Litigation
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250