In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, allowing states to decide on the legality of abortion. This led to a ban in North Dakota, which was replaced in 2023 by legislators with a new law that included more exceptions. Now, the state’s sole abortion clinic, Red River Women’s Clinic, is challenging this law, and whether the case will go to trial is uncertain, told ABC News.
On Tuesday, attorneys for the state requested the lawsuit be dismissed, arguing that the Red River Women’s Clinic does not have standing to take the case to trial. However, the clinic maintains that many facts need to be resolved, which only a trial can address.
The state contends that the 2023 amended abortion law should be upheld because it provides the exceptions the clinic sought. They also argue that physicians can use their medical judgment when performing legal abortions. “They may treat it differently. It doesn’t make the statute unconstitutional because a doctor may treat a condition differently,” said Daniel Gaustad, attorney for the state.
Conversely, the clinic’s attorneys argue that the law is vague, leading to confusion among doctors. They claim that even the state’s experts disagree on interpreting the new law. “In their expert reports that the law is sufficiently clear to physicians. Which begs the question on how the law can be clear when physicians don’t agree on how to interpret it,” said Meetra Mehdizaden, attorney for the clinic.
Judge Bruce Romanick questioned what would be different if the case went to trial compared to the current court presentations. The clinic responded that a trial would allow for direct questioning and determination of expert credibility. “At trial, plaintiffs and their experts will explain how these restrictions on access to health-preserving abortion care needlessly increase the risks to pregnant patients and prevent physicians from providing the standard of care in numerous situations,” said Mehdizaden.
The state insists that no new information would emerge from a trial, and the issue should be settled now. “You’re spot on. You’re not going to get any more information than what you’ve got now. It’s a legal question,” said Gaustad.
Additionally, the state argued that since the clinic relocated to Minnesota in 2022, it lacks the right to bring the case in North Dakota. The clinic disagrees, stating that treatment varies for North Dakota versus Minnesota patients due to North Dakota’s law.
The trial is scheduled for August, but this could change depending on Judge Romanick’s ruling, which is expected within the next week or so.