Judge’s ruling opens the floodgates to chemical-induced abortions in Missouri
CLICK HERE to read a related story in the St. Louis Review.
Chemically induced abortions are set to resume in Missouri, following a June 18 court ruling.
Jackson County Circuit Judge Jerri J. Zhang’s 20-page decision strikes down most of the regulations on abortion that Missouri lawmakers have enacted over the past several decades.
“With this ruling, we’re going to see what a fully unregulated abortion industry looks like, and I don’t think anyone is going to like it,” said Jamie Morris JD, executive director and general counsel of the Missouri Catholic Conference (MCC), public-policy agency of the state’s four Roman Catholic dioceses.
“This is why we need to vote ‘yes’ on Amendment 3 this November,” he added.
Passage of Amendment 3 to the Missouri Constitution would substantially modify a previous amendment narrowly passed by Missouri voters in November 2024, guaranteeing “reproductive freedom.”
Amendment 3 would restore lawmakers’ authority to regulate abortion and make it exceptionally rare.
Judge Zhang’s 20-page ruling is based on the 2024 amendment.
“This court decision represents the worst-case scenario that we were warning people about two years ago,” said Mr. Morris.
Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood of Great Plains, which provides abortions in Overland Park, Kansas; and the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri filed a lawsuit claiming the state’s abortion regulations are unconstitutional under the 2024 amendment.
The amendment states in part:
“The right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, interfered with, delayed or otherwise restricted unless the government demonstrates that such action is justified by a compelling governmental interest achieved by the least restrictive means. Any denial, interference, delay, or restriction of the right to reproductive freedom shall be presumed invalid.”
Judge Zhang heard testimony from abortion-rights supporters and opponents during a 10-day bench trial held in January in downtown Kansas City.
Among those testifying in support of keeping the regulations were representatives of the MCC and 40 Days for Life of Central Missouri.
Open floodgates
Four years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed its 1973 decisions that had legalized abortion in all 50 states.
Missouri lawmakers had already passed a law effectively outlawing elective abortions in the state if the Supreme Court’s 1973 rulings were ever overturned.
Abortion-access supporters responded to the near-total ban by collecting signatures to get the 2024 constitutional amendment onto the statewide ballot.
The amendment passed, 52 percent to 48 percent.
Mr. Morris noted that before this year’s June 18 ruling, a limited number of surgical abortions were being performed in the state following the 2024 amendment, while chemical abortions were being argued in court.
“The money is in chemical abortions,” he said. “What this ruling does is really open the floodgates. Now, I think we’ll see the full consequences and the full dangers of the 2024 amendment.”
Other state regulations struck down in the ruling include:
- licensing requirements for abortion facilities;
- the requirement that only medical doctors with admitting privileges at a nearby hospital may perform abortions;
- the requirement of a complication plan for people performing chemical-induced abortions;
- the 72-hour waiting period between a patient’s initial consultation and the carrying-out of an abortion;
- the mandatory distribution of information about the risks of abortion, for people seeking an abortion in the state or being referred for one in another state; and
- potential criminal penalties for abortion-providers that fail to follow these regulations.
Judge Zhang left intact the state’s requirement that women seeking a chemical abortion must have an in-person consultation with a doctor before receiving a prescription for the abortion drugs.
“There was testimony given that in-person appointments are needed to confirm the gestational age of the baby in the womb,” said Mr. Morris.
The Food and Drug Administration has only approved the use of abortion-inducing chemicals for early-stage abortion. Taking the drugs later in pregnancy could threaten the life of the mother.
Accountability
Judge Zhang likely will not have the final say.
Near the beginning of her ruling, she stated her objective to “decide this matter as expeditiously as possible so the parties may continue their litigation journey to the Missouri Supreme Court.”
At several points in the ruling, she refers to existing regulations and licensing requirements for healthcare professionals, asserting that special regulations for abortion clinics are redundant and unnecessary.
Mr. Morris wonders how much force the other restrictions actually have since the passage of the 2024 amendment.
“The question no one has addressed yet is: Can an abortion provider who commits malpractice be disciplined by a court or even by their own regulatory body or licensing board?” he said.
He pointed to a phrase in Section 5 of the 2024 amendment: “... Nor shall any person assisting a person in exercising their right to reproductive freedom with that person’s consent be penalized, prosecuted or otherwise subjected to adverse action for doing so.”
“My question is: What happens if an abortion provider commits malpractice in the process of helping an individual exercise their ‘right to reproductive freedom,’ with their consent?” said Mr. Morris. “Wouldn’t it be ‘an adverse action’ if you get your license suspended or if you get a medical malpractice suit?
“What happens if someone gets harmed?” he continued. “You could argue that under the wording of the 2024 amendment, you could be completely negligent while carrying out an abortion and not be held accountable.”
He said the same could be argued for a doctor who is negligent while a woman is giving birth.
“Having a baby is also an exercise of ‘reproductive freedom,’” Mr. Morris noted. “So, under the 2024 amendment, is there any protection for the women? We don’t know.”
Priorities
Guided by the state’s Roman Catholic bishops with input from a Public Policy Committee made up of people from all four dioceses, the MCC lobbies on the Church’s behalf for laws and public policies that uphold human life, religious freedom and the common good.
Mr. Morris pointed out that neither this court ruling nor the amendment it’s based on do anything to address the most common reasons women seek abortions in the first place.
“None of it is going to help mothers and their preborn children,” he said. “It provides nothing that a woman who is abortion-minded needs. It addresses none of the root issues and the pain these women are going through and the needs they have.”
He emphasized that the key to reigning in unregulated abortion in Missouri is to pass Amendment 3 on Tuesday, Nov. 3.
“If Catholics want to protect life, if we want to protect more women and children, we need to pass Amendment 3 this November to undo this bad decision and give our state Legislature the opportunity to set common-sense regulations on the abortion industry,” he said.
“Talk to your friends, talk to your family, and make them aware that Amendment 3 is coming,” he stated. “And then we can get back to the hard work of finding ways to give these women what they actually need.”
Visit https://mocatholic.org/amendment-3/ for further information about Amendment 3.
