Sean J. Young (left) and Andrea Young of the ACLU of Georgia. (Photos: John Disney/ALM)

Advocacy groups that have already filed a constitutional challenge to Georgia's abortion ban asked a federal judge Tuesday to enjoin the state from enforcing the law while the case proceeds.

“Our first priority is to block this law from going into effect during the pendency of this litigation,” ACLU Georgia Legal Director Sean J. Young told the Daily Report.

Young represents SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective and numerous others who have sued Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Attorney General Chris Carr and prosecutors around the state in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. They allege the abortion ban created by House Bill 481 is unconstitutional and violates U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

The case has been assigned to Judge Steve Jones.

Attorney General Chris Carr, tasked with defending the state, declined to comment.

Young said it's too soon to tell how long it will take to schedule briefings and a hearing. “But the immediate priority is to block this law before January 2020,” he said.

The document filed Tuesday said the “balance of harm tips decidedly” in favor of SisterSong and the other advocacy groups challenging the ban.

“While plaintiffs and their patients and members will suffer numerous irreparable harms without an injunction, defendants will suffer no injury whatsoever; plaintiffs' requested relief will simply preserve the status quo of nearly five decades,” the motion said.

“I think this is a very important step,” said ACLU Georgia Executive Director Andrea Young, who is also a lawyer. “We want women in Georgia to be assured that we're fighting to defend their constitutional rights. We're going to do everything in our power to make sure it never takes effect.”

In laying out precedent and legal reasoning for the injunction, the document filed Tuesday gives a preview of the arguments to come.

The law bans abortion after embryonic cardiac activity can be detected with ultrasound monitoring equipment. Proponents have used the term “heartbeat bill” to describe this and similar laws recently passed in other states. Those opposed to the bans say that name is intentionally misleading and used to incite an emotional reaction.

“In a typically developing embryo, cells that eventually form the basis for development of the heart later in pregnancy produce cardiac activity that is generally detectable at approximately six weeks from a women's last menstrual period,” the document filed Tuesday said.

At that point, many women don't know they're pregnant. Even if they do, they likely would not have had time to confirm pregnancy and schedule a medical appointment. “The great majority of abortions take place at or after that point,” the memo said. The embryonic stage of pregnancy lasts 10 weeks, when the fetal stage begins. Viability comes months later.

Viability—the ability of a baby to live apart from the mother—is the standard in the landmark Supreme Court decision for Roe v. Wade in 1973.

The document filed Tuesday includes extensive cites to Roe and other decisions upholding it, starting with Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey in 1992.

“Since Roe, the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that a 'woman's right to terminate her pregnancy before viability is the most central principle of Roe v. Wade. It is a rule of law and a component of liberty we cannot renounce,'” the motion said. “Therefore, a ban on abortion at any point before viability is per se unconstitutional, no matter what interests the state asserts to support it.”

The memo supporting the motion also took issue with the personhood provision in the Georgia law intended as a way to defeat Roe v. Wade. HB 481 defines and embryo or fetus as a “natural person” the same as “any human being.” The document said defining a “natural person” as “any human being including an unborn child” makes not only this law but other Georgia laws unconstitutionally vague.

“Thus, every time the term 'person' or 'human being' appears in the Georgia Code—and they appear hundreds of times—it must be read to include in utero embryos/fetuses at any stage of development,” the motion said. “Given this broad reach, it is unsurprising that the Personhood Definition renders numerous criminal and civil provisions of the Georgia Code unclear.”

The case is SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective v. Brian Kemp, Civil Action No.: 1:19-cv-02973-SCJ.