Missouri judge again blocks many of the state's anti-abortion laws
The order by Jackson County Circuit Judge Jerri Zhang said the abortion restrictions likely violate a state constitutional right to abortion that was approved by voters last year.
Planned Parenthood said the order clears the way for it to again provide procedural abortions in Missouri.
But Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said his office 'will expeditiously appeal this ruling.'
The court order marks the latest twist in a multiyear battle that has seen Missouri swing back and forth between banning and allowing most abortions.
When the U.S. Supreme Court ended a nationwide right to abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, it triggered a Missouri law to take effect banning abortions 'except in cases of medical emergency." But abortion-rights activists gathered initiative petition signatures to reverse that law.
Last November, voters narrowly approved a constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to abortion until fetal viability, generally considered sometime past 21 weeks of pregnancy. That made Missouri the only state where voters have used a ballot measure to overturn a ban on abortion at all stages of pregnancy.
The state Supreme Court ruled in May that Zhang had applied the wrong standard when issuing rulings in February and December that blocked Missouri's abortion restrictions.
Upon reconsideration, Zhang again issued preliminary injunctions against the abortion ban. The judge also reimposed a hold on various other laws, including a 72-hour waiting period for abortions, numerous abortion facility licensure requirements and a mandate that physicians performing abortions have admitting privileges at certain types of hospitals located within 30 miles (48 kilometers) or 15 minutes of where an abortion is provided.
'Abortion is legal again in Missouri because voters demanded it and we fought for it,' said Emily Wales, president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains. 'Care starts again on Monday in Kansas City."
Planned Parenthood clinics in central Missouri and St. Louis also "will work as quickly as possible to resume scheduling abortion appointments,' said Margot Riphagen, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers.
The attorney general's office said it will keep up the legal fight.
'Missouri will not stand idly by while the abortion industry seeks to strip away basic medical safeguards,' Bailey's office said in a statement. "We will continue to uphold the State's compelling interest in protecting women's health, safety, and informed consent.'
Thursday's order did not address medication abortions, which remain on hold while Planned Parenthood wrangles with the state over abortion regulations.
The court battle is just one part of Missouri's ongoing abortion debate.
In May, the Republican-led Legislature approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would reimpose an abortion ban — but with exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest. The measure could be on the ballot in 2026 or sooner.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
9 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
US-India Ties Under Strain During Trump's Second Term
Rockefeller International Chairman Ruchir Sharma says the relationship between President Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was off to a bad start during Trump's second term due to a series of "personal" misunderstandings. He appeared on Bloomberg's Insight with Haslinda Amin. (Source: Bloomberg)
CNN
9 minutes ago
- CNN
Zelensky changed his tactics for Trump this time — and his outfit
Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink Follow During Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's visit to the White House on Monday, he spoke with a familiar figure – a right-wing reporter who had famously called out his choice of attire during Zelensky's contentious meeting with President Donald Trump earlier in the year. This time, however, the tone – and the clothing – was markedly different. 'You look fabulous in that suit,' said Brian Glenn, a pro-Trump pundit who works for MAGA streaming startup Real America's Voice. 'I said the same thing,' Trump remarked, turning to Zelensky and telling him: 'Isn't that nice? That's the one that attacked you last time.' Zelensky, wearing a sharp black field jacket, black shirt and black slacks, quipped to the reporter: 'You are in the same suit. I changed, you did not.' It might seem like an innocuous exchange – but Zelensky's change in wardrobe reflects the shift in tactics he's taken in the months since that disastrous meeting in February, when Trump and Vice President JD Vance excoriated the Ukrainian president, calling him disrespectful and ungrateful in front of the world's cameras. The blowout argument in the Oval Office was over various things: the American leaders accused Zelensky of standing in the way of a peace agreement with Russia, while Zelensky expressed disbelief at the notion of diplomacy with the country that had invaded Ukraine. But before all of that, it was about Zelensky's outfit. Since the war began, Zelensky has become known for his military-style shirts, typically in army green or black, and cargo pants. It's the outfit he's worn in the many televised national addresses and speeches he's delivered throughout the conflict – as if to remind his audience they were looking at a wartime leader. Widely regarded as a gesture of solidarity with Ukrainian troops, the outfit has become synonymous with Zelensky. But when he showed up in his usual minimalist garb to the White House in February, Trump was instantly displeased. 'Oh, you're all dressed up,' he remarked sarcastically, as he greeted Zelensky and shook his hand. It felt particularly pointed from Trump – a showman and former television host who has meticulously cultivated his image over the years, from his customary suit and tie to his love of all things gold (a color that now covers the White House, from gold cherubs in the Oval Office to gold figurines on the mantle). Before the Oval Office meeting devolved into a shouting match, Zelensky was asked by the reporter, Glenn, why he was not wearing a suit in the United States' highest office. 'I will wear a costume after this war will finish, yes,' Zelensky said, responding in English. 'Maybe something like yours, yes, maybe something better. I don't know, we will see. Maybe something cheaper. Thank you.' Things went south from there. But almost immediately afterward, Zelensky went into damage control – publicly thanking Trump and the United States for their support of Ukraine, and working to repair his relationship with the president. He has been coached by some European leaders on how to better approach his counterpart – with many of those leaders showing up on Monday at the White House in a show of Western unity and support. During subsequent encounters with Trump this year, Zelensky also wore more formal clothing, including at the Vatican for Pope Francis' funeral and at a NATO summit in the Netherlands. Ahead of Monday's meeting, US and Ukrainian officials discussed Zelensky's attire – with the understanding he should not arrive wearing his usual military-style clothing, said a European official. It appears their move has paid off – with even Glenn taking a conciliatory tone after Trump praised Zelensky's new look. 'I apologize to you,' Glenn said, referring to their February interaction. 'You look wonderful.'
Associated Press
17 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Conservative network Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims
DENVER (AP) — The conservative network Newsmax will pay $67 million to settle a lawsuit accusing it of defaming a voting equipment company by spreading lies about President Donald Trump's 2020 election loss, according to documents filed Monday. The settlement comes after Fox News Channel paid $787.5 million to settle a similar lawsuit in 2023 and Newsmax paid what court papers describe as $40 million to settle a libel lawsuit from a different voting machine manufacturer, Smartmatic, which also was a target of pro-Trump conspiracy theories on the network. Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis had ruled earlier that Newsmax did indeed defame Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems by airing false information about the company and its equipment. But Davis left it to a jury to eventually decide whether that was done with malice, and, if so, how much Dominion deserved from Newsmax in damages. Newsmax and Dominion reached the settlement before the trial could take place. The settlement was disclosed by Newsmax in a new filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. It said the deal was reached Friday. 'Newsmax believed it was critically important for the American people to hear both sides of the election disputes that arose in 2020,' the company said in a statement. 'We stand by our coverage as fair, balanced, and conducted within professional standards of journalism.' A spokesperson for Dominion said the company was pleased to have settled the lawsuit. The disclosure of the settlement came as Trump, who lost his 2020 reelection bid to Democrat Joe Biden, vowed in a social media post Monday to eliminate mail-in ballots and voting machines such as those supplied by Dominion and other companies. It was unclear how the Republican president could achieve that. The same judge also handled the Dominion-Fox News case and made a similar ruling that the network repeated numerous lies by Trump's allies about his 2020 loss despite internal communications showing Fox officials knew the claims were bogus. At the time, Davis found it was 'CRYSTAL clear' that none of the allegations was true. Internal correspondence from Newsmax officials likewise shows they knew the claims were baseless. 'How long are we going to play along with election fraud?' Newsmax host Bob Sellers said two days after the 2020 election was called for Biden, according to internal documents revealed as part of the case. Newsmax took pride that it was not calling the election for Biden and, the internal documents show, saw a business opportunity in catering to viewers who believed Trump won. Private communications that surfaced as part of Dominion's earlier defamation case against Fox News also revealed how the network's business interests intersected with decisions it made related to coverage of Trump's 2020 election claims. At Newsmax, employees repeatedly warned against false allegations from pro-Trump guests such as attorney Sidney Powell, according to documents in the lawsuit. In one text, even Newsmax owner Chris Ruddy, a Trump ally, said he found it 'scary' that Trump was meeting with Powell. Dominion was at the heart of many of the wild claims aired by guests on Newsmax and elsewhere, who promoted a conspiracy theory involving deceased Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez to rig the machines for Biden. The network retracted some of the more bombastic allegations in December 2020. Though Trump has insisted his fraud claims are real, there's no evidence they were, and the lawsuits in the Fox and Newsmax cases show how some of the president's biggest supporters knew they were false at the time. Trump's then-attorney general, William Barr, said there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Trump and his backers lost dozens of lawsuits alleging fraud, some before Trump-appointed judges. Numerous recounts, reviews and audits of the election results, including some run by Republicans, turned up no signs of significant wrongdoing or error and affirmed Biden's win. After returning to office, Trump pardoned those who tried to halt the transfer of power during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol and directed his Department of Justice to investigate Chris Krebs, a former Trump cybersecurity appointee who had vouched for the security and accuracy of the 2020 election. As an initial trial date approached in the Dominion case earlier this year, Trump issued an executive order attacking the law firm that litigated it and the Fox case, Susman Godfrey. The order, part of a series targeting law firms Trump has tussled with, cited Susman Godfrey's work on elections and said the government would not do business with any of its clients or permit any of its staff in federal buildings.
