Preterm-Cleveland, et al, v. Dave Yost, et al.

The challenged abortion restrictions unnecessarily require the overwhelming majority of patients to make two trips to a health center and, in practice, often force patients to wait much longer than 24 hours to receive an abortion. This delays—and in some cases, completely prevents —patients from receiving an abortion. Under Ohio law, no other medical treatments or procedures that are similarly time-sensitive are subject to a legally-imposed waiting period or a requirement that a patient make a separate, in person visit to obtain state-mandated information prior to receiving care. The challenged abortion restrictions provide no health benefit and lack any medical justification. Rather, by unnecessarily delaying time-sensitive abortion care and forcing upon patients information that is often harmful, distressing, and stigmatizing, the laws only harm Ohioans’ health and well-being.

In August, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, stopping the state from enforcing these restrictions as the case continues towards a final resolution on the merits. This is the first decision in a case challenging an abortion restriction under the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment to the Ohio Constitution, which took effect in December 2023.

The lawsuit was filed in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas on behalf of Preterm-Cleveland, Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, Women’s Med Group Professional Corporation, Northeast Ohio Women’s Center, and Dr. Catherine Romanos.