A North Dakota judge denied a temporary block on a part of the state's revised abortion laws that would have allowed doctors to perform the procedure when they deem it necessary to save a patient's life or health.
The request asked the judge to bar the state from enforcing the law against physicians who use their "good-faith medical judgment" to perform an abortion because of complications that could pose "a risk of infection, hemorrhage, high blood pressure, or which otherwise makes continuing a pregnancy unsafe."
But on Tuesday, State District Judge Bruce Romanick said the request for a preliminary injunction "is not appropriate and the plaintiffs have presented no authority for the court to grant the specific relief requested."
North Dakota, which borders Saskatchewan and Manitoba, outlaws all abortions except in cases in which women could face death or a "serious health risk." People who perform abortions could be charged with a felony under the law, but patients would not.
The judge said the plaintiffs appeared to request that he, "by way of a preliminary injunction, change application of the exception from 'reasonable medical judgment' to 'good faith medical judgment.'
"Plaintiffs have cited the court with no legal authority that would allow the court to re-write the statute in this manner under the pretense of providing injunctive relief," he added.
The state's revised abortion laws also provide an exception for pregnancies caused by rape and incest, but only in the first six weeks, before many women know they are pregnant. Furthermore, it allows for treatment of ectopic and molar pregnancies, in which there is no chance for the fetus to survive.
"Though we are disappointed by today's decision, the court did not reach the constitutional questions at the heart of this case," said Meetra Mehdizade, attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, in a statement.
"We remain confident that we will prevail after the court hears further evidence of how this law harms pregnant North Dakotans."
But Republican state Sen. Janne Myrdal, who brought the 2023 bill revising the laws, welcomed the judge's ruling.
"I think we have something that's very clear for physicians to see," she said.
"I think it's common sense what we put in as far as the health exceptions, and it goes with the intent of the legislators, so I applaud this judge for reading into it and realizing that the authority lies with us, as far as writing the law, and interpreting it simply shouldn't be that hard for the physicians."
The Red River Women's Clinic in Fargo, N.D., sued the state last year after the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, which overturned the court's landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling establishing a nationwide right to abortion.
The lawsuit targeted the state's since-repealed trigger ban — designed to go into effect immediately if the court overturned Roe v. Wade — as unconstitutional.
The clinic has now moved out of the state, from Fargo to neighbouring Moorhead, Minn., where abortion is legal.
