Judge Upholds Florida's 24-Hour Wait Period for Abortion
The ruling comes a month after the Florida Legislature sent Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis a bill banning abortion after 15 weeks. DeSantis is expected to sign it.
April 13, 2022 at 10:44 AM
4 minute read
Women will have to wait 24 hours before getting an abortion under a ruling by a Florida judge in a nearly seven-year battle over the waiting period.
Circuit Judge Angela Dempsey in Tallahassee tossed out a lawsuit filed on behalf of a Gainesville women's clinic, saying other medical procedures have similar waiting periods and other important decisions like getting married, getting divorced and buying a gun have longer waiting periods.
"Twenty-four hours is the minimum time needed to sleep on such an important decision," Judge Dempsey wrote.
The waiting period goes into effect once Dempsey signs one additional piece of paperwork.
Dempsey also added that exceptions for the life of a mother, documented cases of rape and incest, and victims of domestic violence and human traffic support the constitutionality of the law.
The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops praised the decision.
"The 24-hour reflection period is a reasonable measure that will empower women to make truly informed, deliberate decisions apart from the abortion industry's pressures," Christie Arnold, the organization's lobbyist, said in a news release.
The ruling comes a month after the Florida Legislature sent Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis a bill banning abortion after 15 weeks. DeSantis is expected to sign it.
"Since the passage of this law, Florida politicians have continued to place hurdles in the path of people seeking abortion care as part of a larger effort to push care out of reach," said American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Julia Kaye. "The state legislature took its most extreme step yet in attacking reproductive freedom earlier last month."
The ACLU is evaluating its next steps in the legal battle.
Former governor and current U.S. Sen. Rick Scott signed the bill into law in June 2015. The ACLU of Florida and the Center for Reproductive Rights filed the suit the next day on behalf of the Bread and Roses Women's Health Center in Gainesville.
The lawsuit argued that many women will have a difficult time scheduling appointments on two consecutive days because of work or school schedules, child care availability and the need to travel, especially if they have a low income.
It also said the exceptions in the law such as rape and incest are meaningless because they require documentation and the majority of victims do not report such crimes. The creation of a two-day process also increases the chances that a woman's abuser will discover the pregnancy and force her to not have the abortion, the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit has been dragged out for nearly seven years. A trial court initially threw it out without a full trial, finding it unconstitutional. In a 2-1 ruling, the 1st District Court of Appeal sent the lawsuit back to the circuit court, saying the state had built evidence that supports the constitutionality of the law. The court also lifted an injunction that was temporarily blocking the law from taking effect during legal proceedings.
The state Supreme Court quickly put the injunction back in place while the case continued.
An abortion clinic in Jacksonville began implementing the 24-hour waiting period last week in anticipation of the judge's ruling. Amber Gavin, head of advocacy and operations at A Woman's Choice, said the clinic didn't want patients to suddenly have to change travel plans to quickly adhere to the law.
"This is incredibly hard on some of them. They come to us and have already taken the day off from work, arranged child care," she said. "Some of them had not realized this was going to happen, so it's really painful and hard for our staff to tell the patient that the state is mandating this."
Gavin said it will also require more staffing hours, and for physicians to be at the clinic longer than before.
___
Associated Press writer Adriana Gomez Licon in Miami contributed to this report.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 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 All'I've Seen Terrible Things': Lawyer Predicts Spike in Hazing Suits
How Florida Supreme Court Changes Affect Firms: AI Concerns at Forefront
11th Circuit Rejects Private School's Religious Rights Claim When Stopped From Broadcasting Public Prayer
Trending Stories
- 1Reviewing Judge Merchan's Unconditional Discharge
- 2With New Civil Jury Selection Rule, Litigants Should Carefully Weigh Waiver Risks
- 3Young Lawyers Become Old(er) Lawyers
- 4Caught In the In Between: A Legal Roadmap for the Sandwich Generation
- 5Top 10 Developments, Lessons, and Reminders of 2024
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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