Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region v. Taft

In Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region v. Taft, 444 F.3d 502 (6th Cir. 2006), the Sixth Circuit issued a pro-abortion ruling that affirmed in part a preliminary injunction against an Ohio pro-life law that banned off-label use of a medication used for chemical abortions:

“  |  The district court's primary basis for concluding that Plaintiffs had established a strong likelihood of success on the merits was the conclusion that every statute which regulates abortion must contain a health or life exception. This holding was error. However, the district court alternatively held that Plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits even if the health or life exception requirement was not a per se requirement because substantial medical evidence had been presented that the Act could pose a significant risk to women's health or lives. Based on the evidence presented at the preliminary injunction stage, this conclusion was not an abuse of discretion. Consequently, there is no basis for overturning the district court's determination that Plaintiffs had established a strong likelihood of succeeding on the merits of their claim that the Act is unconstitutional because it lacks a health or life exception. However, in light of Ayotte, the validity of the broad preliminary injunction entered by the district court must be reconsidered. For the reasons discussed above, this court need not address the merits of the State's remaining claims of error. The district court's order is AFFIRMED in part and VACATED in part.  |  ”

|
|

Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region v. Taft, 444 F.3d 502, 517-18 (6th Cir. 2006).