Plaintiffs in this case are board-certified obstetrician-gynecologists. Enforcement of the ban will bar them from providing pre-viability pregnancy terminations for their patients at or after 20 weeks, in contravention of their patients' rights and in some cases at the expense of their patients' health. They therefore challenged the ban as applied to abortions performed prior to viability on the grounds that it violates their patients' right under the Fourteenth Amendment, and sought preliminary and permanent injunctive and declaratory relief [in the district court].

This is the latest development in the ongoing reproductive rights controversy [JURIST backgrounder]. In July a federal judge blocked a Mississippi law [JURIST report] that would have effectively shut down the state's only abortion clinic. Two weeks ago, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt appealed a ruling [JURIST report] by a district court judge that held that an abortion ultrasound bill is unconstitutional. Earlier last month, Louisiana Governor Bob Jindal signed a bill increasing abortion restrictions in the state [JURIST report]. In May, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed a bill allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense drugs [JURIST report] that they "reasonably believe" might result in the termination of a pregnancy. Earlier that month, a judge for the District Court of Oklahoma County ruled [JURIST report] that a law restricting how doctors may use abortion-inducing drugs to treat patients was a violation of the Oklahoma Constitution. In March, Utah passed a law requiring a woman seeking an abortion to wait 72 hours [JURIST report] prior to obtaining the procedure.