51黑料

JEFFERSON CITY 鈥� Even though the Missouri Supreme Court effectively reinstated the state鈥檚 abortion ban in a major ruling on Tuesday, the state鈥檚 highest court did not actually rule on abortion access itself.

At least for now.

The impact of the order was swift, placing Missouri in a precarious moment. While abortion rights remain enshrined in the state constitution, access is currently halted under what providers call a 鈥渄e facto abortion ban.鈥� Clinics began canceling abortion appointments within hours of the order.

But the state Supreme Court鈥檚 decision itself was largely procedural, a fact that has sparked hope among abortion rights advocates that access will ultimately be restored. Whether that happens 鈥� and how long it will take 鈥� remains unclear, legal experts told The Star.

鈥淚 don鈥檛 think anybody should be claiming any victories (or defeat) based on this particular procedural ruling,鈥� said Joseph Dandurand, an attorney who served more than two decades as a judge before working in the Missouri Attorney General鈥檚 Office under Democrat Chris Koster.

The ruling, signed by Chief Justice Mary R. Russell, ordered a Jackson County judge to vacate two preliminary injunctions that had allowed abortions to resume in the state. The temporary rulings, issued by Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Jerri Zhang in December and February, blocked a series of longstanding restrictions on abortion providers.

Those restrictions, often called TRAP laws or Targeted Restrictions on Abortion Providers, included a 72-hour waiting period before receiving an abortion and clinic licensing rules. The regulations effectively caused the number of abortions in Missouri to drop from 6,163 in 2010 to 150 in 2021 before the state鈥檚 former ban was enacted in 2022.

Zhang鈥檚 pair of rulings argued that many of those restrictions should be blocked after voters in November approved an abortion rights amendment, called Amendment 3, that enshrined reproductive rights in the state constitution.

However, the state Supreme Court on Tuesday found that Zhang applied the wrong legal standard in her rulings and ordered her to vacate the orders. The court ordered Zhang to reevaluate those rulings, leaving open the possibility for her to issue another injunction blocking the restrictions.

Specifically, the court said that when Zhang decides whether to block the restrictions, she must apply a different standard with four specific legal criteria. Tom Bastian, a spokesperson for the ACLU of Missouri, which sued to strike down the restrictions, said his organization has already met this legal standard and expects Zhang to issue a new injunction blocking the regulations.

How swiftly that happens 鈥� and how long Missouri will remain a state with no abortion access 鈥� largely depends on how fast Zhang moves to issue a new preliminary injunction. And that could depend on whether she relies on the current evidence before her or asks the parties involved for new information, experts said.

鈥淚 think you鈥檙e looking at, you know, probably a matter of one month at the shortest and, like, three months at the longest,鈥� said Mary Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California-Davis, who cautioned that it鈥檚 hard to predict how quickly courts will act.

The plaintiffs in the case, which include Planned Parenthood and the ACLU, will go back to court and argue that the restrictions should still be blocked under the legal standard outlined by the state Supreme Court, said Ziegler, who closely follows legal fights over abortion access.

Missouri Republican officials, who include attorneys in Attorney General Andrew Bailey鈥檚 office, will, in turn, argue that the legal standard is much harder to meet and that the plaintiffs should not be granted a new injunction, Ziegler said.

Those legal fights will likely play out before a January trial in which Zhang will decide whether the restrictions should be permanently struck down. At least one legal expert who spoke with The Star anticipated that Zhang would once again temporarily block the restrictions, which would likely happen before the trial.

鈥淚 think that just reading some of those laws that are targeted at abortion providers and reading Amendment 3, it鈥檚 pretty clear that a fair number of them just violate (the amendment),鈥� said Michael Wolff, a former Missouri Supreme Court chief justice. 鈥淭hey impose restrictions that are contrary to what the amendment allows.鈥�

Access halted for now

Amid the legal debates over whether Zhang will once again effectively allow abortions to resume, advocates on both sides of the abortion debate are left to grapple with the impact of Tuesday鈥檚 decision.

Abortion opponents, including Bailey and others who fought against restored access, immediately celebrated the ruling as a victory. While some acknowledged that the ruling was likely temporary, most touted the fact that it meant abortions would be halted for now.

Bailey, who sued to vacate Zhang鈥檚 rulings, called Tuesday鈥檚 order 鈥渁 win for women and children.鈥�

鈥淚鈥檓 proud of the work our office has done to hold the line, making Missouri the safest state in the nation for women and families,鈥� Bailey said in a statement issued by his office.

Sam Lee, a longtime anti-abortion lobbyist in Jefferson City, also championed the order. Unlike Bailey, whose statement focused solely on the restrictions that remained in place, Lee specifically pointed to the fact that the Supreme Court order would halt abortions.

鈥淲e鈥檙e ecstatic that this aggressive move by Attorney General Bailey has paid off,鈥� Lee said. 鈥淎nd every day that they鈥檙e not doing abortions in Missouri is a great day in Missouri.鈥�

For some abortion rights supporters, the ruling was a stark reminder of the political reality in Missouri. While nearly 52% of voters enshrined abortion rights in the constitution and overturned the state鈥檚 ban on the procedure, voters also elected Republican politicians who fought against restored access in the courtroom and the state Capitol.

鈥淎ttorney General Andrew Bailey and anti-abortion politicians in Jeff City have once again weaponized our political system against Missourians,鈥� said Mallory Schwarz, the executive director of Abortion Action Missouri.

While abortion rights supporters remain confident that the restrictions will ultimately be blocked, abortions are now largely inaccessible in the state. Planned Parenthood clinics in Kansas City and Columbia almost immediately began canceling appointments after the ruling, Emily Wales, the president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, confirmed.

The affiliate had offered procedural abortions in both cities in the months after voters overturned Missouri鈥檚 abortion ban in November. Until the restrictions are lifted, Wales said, Missourians are 鈥渓ess safe and less free.鈥�

In addition to the legal fights over whether Amendment 3 allows a judge to block the longstanding regulations on abortion, supporters and opponents are also gearing up for another ballot fight over abortion access.

Republican lawmakers earlier this month voted to put a new abortion ban on the 2026 statewide ballot. If approved by voters, the proposed constitutional amendment would strike down the November vote that legalized access and ban nearly all abortions in the state.

For Ziegler, the law professor, the instability surrounding abortion access in Missouri will likely continue up until the January trial 鈥� and potentially afterwards. Complete access to abortion will not be safe in Missouri until the state elects different politicians, she said.

鈥淢issouri keeps electing people who are not just conservative Republicans, but who are strongly opposed to abortion,鈥� Ziegler said. 鈥淵ou have 鈥� abortion protections and elected officials whose mission is to eliminate protections for abortion. You鈥檙e going to end up with a lot of uncertainty.鈥�

Jonathan Shorman of the Kansas City Star contributed reporting.