FACTS:
In 2021 Ohio passed S.B. 260, a law prohibiting telemedicine abortions. Medication abortions are safe and effective whether they are performed in a medical office or at home under the remote supervision of a licensed healthcare provider.
Especially at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telemedicine has been increasingly used for telemedicine abortions for the safety and convenience of patients. Ohio abortion clinics sued in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas. In April 2021 they obtained a statewide injunction protecting the use of telemedicine for abortion care in Ohio. We joined the lawsuit with the filing of an amended complaint in light of the passage of Issue 1.
LEGAL THEORY:
S.B. 260 violates the new constitutional prohibition on unnecessary legal burdens on reproductive healthcare.
STATUS:
On April 1, 2021 Plaintiffs filed a Complaint in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, along with a motion for Temporary Restraining Oder, blocking the implementation of S.B. 260. The Court granted the TRO on April 7 and entered a preliminary injunction on April 20, over the state’s objections. Defendants moved to dismiss the case on June 1, 2021. The court denied the motion on September 13 and Defendants filed their Answer on December 1, 2021. The case proceeded to discovery. On July 5, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a motion to stay the case pending the resolution of a challenge to Ohio’s then-newly enacted 6-week abortion ban. The stay was granted and remained in effect until after the remand of Preterm v. Yost in January 2024, following the passage of a constitutional amendment protecting reproductive decision-making in Ohio.
On May 9, 2024, Plaintiffs moved to file an amended complaint, addressing the change in the law and adding parties represented by the ACLU of Ohio Foundation. The motion was granted on May 14. Plaintiffs filed a new motion for preliminary injunction on May 22, 2024. On June 5, Defendants filed a motion to stay the case pending a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in a federal case challenging the FDA’s approval for telemedicine administration of the abortion drug mifepristone. On June 13 SCOTUS dismissed this challenge, preserving the availability of mifepristone through mail. On June 20 the court denied the motion for stay as moot and issued a scheduling order. The state opposed the second preliminary injunction motion on June 21.
On August 29 the Court granted our second motion for preliminary injunction, enjoining not just the ban on telemedicine abortion, but also laws that form a blanket prohibition on abortion care by advanced practice clinicians and a ban on off-label use of mifepristone.
On October 29, the Court entered a scheduling order: fact discovery will close March 20, expert discovery will close September 5, 2025, and dispositive motions are due October 20 of next year. The case is scheduled for a bench trial on March 9, 2026, if the case is not resolved before then.
