Iowa Supreme Court says 6-week abortion ban can take effect

A bitterly divided Iowa Supreme Court ruled 4-3 Friday to remove an injunction blocking enforcement of Iowa’s “fetal heartbeat” abortion law and removing legal barriers for future abortion restrictions.

The decision is the latest in a string of legal disputes over the status of abortion in Iowa. It comes after the court in 2022 held that abortion rights are not entitled to the highest level of constitutional protection and a 2023 case in which the court split 3-3 on what the correct legal standard should be for abortion laws.

More: Two years ago, SCOTUS overturned the right to an abortion. Here is how each state changed

The law the court says can take effect bans most abortions after fetal activity can be detected – about the sixth week of pregnancy — with exceptions for rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.

Friday’s majority decision was written by Justice Matthew McDermott, joined by Justices Dana Oxley, David May and Christopher McDonald. It held that laws restricting abortion are only unconstitutional if the state cannot show a “rational basis” for the law.

In a previous case from 2015, the court ruled abortion restrictions were unconstitutional if they imposed an “undue burden” on the rights of the mother. Federal courts at the time defined an undue burden as a “substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability.”

The “rational basis” standard allows the state to impose restrictions if it has a rational basis for doing so – in this case, protecting the life of the unborn – and does not negate a fundamental right, which the Iowa court’s 2022 ruling said abortion was not.

Chief Justice Susan Christensen and Justice Edward Mansfield both wrote dissents, joined by each other and by Justice Thomas Waterman.

Christensen, in her dissent, wrote that the majority “strips Iowa women of their bodily autonomy,” that the law’s exceptions are too narrow to protect women’s health, and that Iowa should have kept its prior legal standard banning abortion restrictions that impose an undue burden on the pregnant woman.

Mansfield’s dissent suggests that the standard imposed by the majority “gives no weight to a woman’s autonomy over her body” and that the Iowa Constitution protects the right not to have children just as much as it protects the rights of parents.

The decision means the injunction blocking the law is lifted and the case will be sent back to the district court, where McDermott writes that where McDermott writes that Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, the lead plaintiff, “cannot show a likelihood of success on the merits” of its challenge to the law under the new legal standard.

Gov. Kim Reynolds and Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, both Republicans, issued statements praising the decision.

“There is no right more sacred than life, and nothing more worthy of our strongest defense than the innocent unborn,” Reynolds said. “Families are the cornerstone of society, and it’s what will keep the foundation of our state and country strong for generations to come.” 

Iowa Democratic Party Chair Rita Hart said in a statement that the decision striped Iowa women “of reproductive rights they have maintained for more than 50 years.”

“It’s obvious Kim Reynolds and Iowa Republicans do not trust women to make their own decisions regarding their own medical care or for doctors to use their best judgment while treating their patients,” Hart said. “Republicans went too far with this abortion ban, and Iowa voters will hold them accountable this November.”

This article will be updated.

William Morris covers courts for the Des Moines Register. He can be contacted at wrmorris2@registermedia.com or 715-573-8166.