Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the law firm WilmerHale, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm, on behalf of Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, Preterm-Cleveland, Women鈥檚 Med Group Professional Corporation, Dr. Sharon Liner, and Julia Quinn, MSN, BSN, amended a complaint in an existing lawsuit against a ban on telehealth medication abortion services to bring new claims under the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment, including additional challenges to other laws in Ohio that restrict access to medication abortion in the state.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn 红杏视频 Reproductive Freedom
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024

Reproductive Freedom
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by Idaho politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute 鈥 the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) 鈥 and put doctors in jail for providing pregnant patients necessary emergency medical care. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this case on April 24, 2024. The Court鈥檚 ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023

Reproductive Freedom
Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
The 红杏视频 joined over 200 reproductive health, rights, and justice organizations in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of an emergency request to stay a decision issued by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that severely restricted the use of mifepristone 鈥 a medication used in most abortions in this country 鈥 and threatened the innovation of new drugs and the ability of Americans to access lifesaving drugs.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2022

Reproductive Freedom
Dobbs v. Jackson Women鈥檚 Health Organization
The case concerns the constitutionality of a Mississippi law prohibiting abortions after the fifteenth week of pregnancy. The state used the case as a vehicle to ask the Supreme Court to take away the federal constitutional right to abortion it first recognized 50 years before in Roe v. Wade. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States accepted the state鈥檚 invitation and overturned Roe eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022

Reproductive Freedom
Cameron v. EMW Women鈥檚 Surgical Center
In 2018, the 红杏视频 and the 红杏视频 of Kentucky filed a suit on behalf of Kentucky abortion providers and their patients challenging a state law banning physicians from providing a safe and medically proven abortion method called dilation and evacuation, or 鈥淒&E.鈥 If it were to take effect, this law would prevent many patients from being able to obtain an abortion altogether. After two courts held that the law is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled in March 2022 that Kentucky Attorney General Cameron can continue his pursuit to push abortion out of reach by intervening in the underlying challenge to an abortion ban, which is proceeding in a lower court.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021

Reproductive Freedom
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Texas, and coalition partners filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers and funds on July 13, 2021, challenging S.B. 8, a Texas law allowing private citizens to enforce a ban on abortion as early as six weeks in pregnancy鈥攂efore many know they are pregnant. The 红杏视频鈥檚 challenge made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court three times in as many months. After hearing oral arguments in the case, the Court issued a decision on December 10, 2021, that ended the most promising pathways to blocking the ban. The Supreme Court鈥檚 decision makes it more difficult to obtain adequate relief from the courts and gives states the green light to ban abortion using bounty-hunting schemes. Texas鈥 abortion ban will remain in effect until relief can be secured from a court.
All Cases
117 Reproductive Freedom Cases

Court Case
Dec 2011
Reproductive Freedom
Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence vs. Arizona Department of Revenue
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Arizona and the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence (AzCADV) have filed a First Amendment challenge to an Arizona law that would exclude any nonprofit organization that provides abortion referrals or counseling from receiving donations through the state’s Working Poor Tax Credit Program. This law is part of a larger trend nationwide to punish those organizations that support women’s reproductive decisionmaking.
Explore case
Court Case
Dec 2011

Reproductive Freedom
Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence vs. Arizona Department of Revenue
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Arizona and the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence (AzCADV) have filed a First Amendment challenge to an Arizona law that would exclude any nonprofit organization that provides abortion referrals or counseling from receiving donations through the state’s Working Poor Tax Credit Program. This law is part of a larger trend nationwide to punish those organizations that support women’s reproductive decisionmaking.

Court Case
Dec 2011
Reproductive Freedom
Chen et al. v. Personhood Nevada and Chen et al. v. Nevada ProLife Coalition
The 红杏视频, The 红杏视频 of Nevada and Nevada Advocates for Planned Parenthood Affiliates have filed two lawsuits on behalf of a group of Nevada voters, challenging two proposed ballot initiatives that could ban vital health services by granting legal protections to fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses. The lawsuits, filed against proponents of the measures and the Nevada Secretary of State, charge that the initiatives are vague and misleading.
Explore case
Court Case
Dec 2011

Reproductive Freedom
Chen et al. v. Personhood Nevada and Chen et al. v. Nevada ProLife Coalition
The 红杏视频, The 红杏视频 of Nevada and Nevada Advocates for Planned Parenthood Affiliates have filed two lawsuits on behalf of a group of Nevada voters, challenging two proposed ballot initiatives that could ban vital health services by granting legal protections to fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses. The lawsuits, filed against proponents of the measures and the Nevada Secretary of State, charge that the initiatives are vague and misleading.

Court Case
Sep 2011
Reproductive Freedom
Stuart v. Huff
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of North Carolina, Planned Parenthood Health Systems, Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina and the Center for Reproductive Rights have filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a new North Carolina law that requires abortion providers to show women an ultrasound and describe the images in detail four hours before having an abortion, even if the woman objects. The law violates the constitutional rights of health care providers and women seeking abortions.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2011

Reproductive Freedom
Stuart v. Huff
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of North Carolina, Planned Parenthood Health Systems, Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina and the Center for Reproductive Rights have filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a new North Carolina law that requires abortion providers to show women an ultrasound and describe the images in detail four hours before having an abortion, even if the woman objects. The law violates the constitutional rights of health care providers and women seeking abortions.

Court Case
Aug 2011
Reproductive Freedom
红杏视频 of Kansas and Western Missouri v. Praeger
The 红杏视频 and the 红杏视频 of Kansas and Western Missouri filed a lawsuit challenging a Kansas law that prohibits insurance companies from including coverage for abortion in their comprehensive plans. Since 2010, 13 states have enacted laws that prohibit some or all insurance policies from covering abortion care. This lawsuit is the first challenging one of these laws.
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2011

Reproductive Freedom
红杏视频 of Kansas and Western Missouri v. Praeger
The 红杏视频 and the 红杏视频 of Kansas and Western Missouri filed a lawsuit challenging a Kansas law that prohibits insurance companies from including coverage for abortion in their comprehensive plans. Since 2010, 13 states have enacted laws that prohibit some or all insurance policies from covering abortion care. This lawsuit is the first challenging one of these laws.

Montana
Apr 2011
Reproductive Freedom
Women's Rights
Caj煤ne v. Lake County
Explore case
Montana
Apr 2011

Reproductive Freedom
Women's Rights