Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed into law a bill that requires women to have two separate appointments with a minimum wait of 24 hours between visits before having an abortion.
“I am proud to stand up for the sanctity of every human life,” Reynolds, a Republican, said of the bill on Monday. “I applaud the Iowa lawmakers who had the courage to stand strong and take action to protect the unborn child.”
The legislation is similar to a bill that was struck down by the Iowa Supreme Court in 2018. The bill Reynolds signed is slated to take effect on Wednesday, but Planned Parenthood of the Heartland filed a lawsuit asking a judge to halt it until the court can review the constitutionality of the legislation.
The 2018 legislation that was struck down by the court required women to wait 72 hours before having an abortion. In that ruling, the judges voted in a 5-2 ruling that a 72-hour wait would increase the costs of the procedure and could prohibit some women from accessing an abortion. Alice Clapman, a lawyer for Planned Parenthood, told the Associated Press that this legislation feels like a repeat of the 2018 bill.
“The situation feels like Groundhog Day because we were here only three years ago seeking the same emergency relief and litigating a mandatory delay law that was indistinguishable from this one,” Clapman said.
Planned Parenthood argued that the abortion legislation signed by Reynolds on Monday did not offer the people of Iowa due process because it was passed at 5 a.m. on a Sunday morning. Judge Mitchell Turner, who is overseeing the case, asked the state to prove that people in Iowa could have had their voices heard during the legislative process.
“Isn’t the hallmark of due process the notion that people require notice and that the citizenry has a right to know what their legislatures are voting on? How does this not fly in the face of due process?” Turner asked the state.
Thomas Ogden, an assistant attorney general, argued that the legislature can pass expedited legislation. He claimed that the court was acting outside its bounds of checks and balances by attempting to control how long legislation must be considered.
“The court’s role is not to police the legislative process,” Ogden said. “That is a role that is left solely with the people of Iowa.”
