The Iowa Supreme Court will announce its decision in a major abortion case tomorrow morning. @IAGovernor asked the court to reinstate a 2018 abortion ban that was struck down in 2019. She didn't appeal at that time but has since appointed 4 new justices.
Almost exactly a year ago, the Iowa Supreme Court majority overturned a 2018 abortion rights precedent (which was the main reason @IAGovernor didn't try to fight for the 6-week ban in 2019).
Background on that decision: bleedingheartland.com/2022/06/20/iow…
The case that the Iowa Supreme Court will resolve tomorrow has a lot of complicated procedural Qs.
It's possible court will lift injunction in 2018 law, which would ban almost all abortions after 6 weeks.
But they could reject on procedural grounds.
One of the 7 Iowa Supreme Court justices (Dana Oxley) recused herself from current abortion case, leaving open possibility of a 3-3 split.
If that happens, the Polk County District Court would remain in effect. That court rejected @IAGovernor's arguments: bleedingheartland.com/2022/12/12/cou…
I want to emphasize how many procedural Qs are at issue in case to be decided tomorrow.
Possible that one or more Iowa Supreme Court justices who would uphold a near-total abortion ban challenged in normal litigation will reject state's effort to reopen a 4-year-old case.
It's also possible 4 or more justices will accept state's arguments that the court precedents under which the 2018 abortion ban was struck down were wrongly decided, so that law should be enforced now. @IAGovernor and #ialegis Rs would prefer not to have to start over next year.
The oral arguments didn't give many clear signals on how this case would be resolved. You can watch here:
One strange thing about this case: @AGIowa Brenna Bird bragged in January that she was taking this case back. (Previous AG Tom Miller declined to defend 2018 abortion ban.)
But state's attorneys didn't handle oral arguments. Alliance Defending Freedom did.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Breaking: Abortion remains LEGAL in Iowa as Iowa Supreme Court splits 3-3 on @IAGovernor's effort to reinstate 2018 abortion ban.
The split ruling leaves the lower court decision in effect under operation of law. So 2018 ban is still enjoined: iowacourts.gov/courtcases/183…
That Polk County District Court decision rejected the state's effort to lift an injunction on 2018 law that would ban almost all abortions after about 6 weeks.
My post from last December: bleedingheartland.com/2022/12/12/cou…
Usually, when the Iowa Supreme Court splits 3-3, they don't write opinions. But this case is an exception. Justice Waterman wrote opinion joined by Chief Justice Christensen and Justice Mansfield. They would have affirmed lower court decision: iowacourts.gov/courtcases/183…
Iowa Senate now taking up bill that would drastically reduce the ability of state auditor to obtain info relevant to an audit.
In committee, this bill was presented as all about protecting Iowans' private info.
Today @MBousselot offered amendment that drastically changed bill.
Bousselot just cited the 2021 Iowa Supreme Court case where the state auditor's office went to court to enforce a subpoena against the University of Iowa. bleedingheartland.com/2021/04/30/uni…
This bill would clarify when an audit begins.
(In committee he never said the bill was about this)
Republican Senator Jeff Edler now presenting the bill that will literally kill Iowa children: the ban on gender-affirming care (meds, hormones, surgery).
Says state has a duty to protect children and every child deserves a "natural" childhood including going through puberty.
Edler says the state already regulates other "harmful" behavior, e.g. doesn't allow children to get a tattoo, even with parental permission.
The flaw in this argument is that EVERY major medical, public health, and psych organization supports gender-affirming care. Not harmful.
Sen @ZachWahls now questioning Edler about why the bill says it doesn't constitute a civil rights violation.
Is pointing out that the bill explicitly restricts access to medical procedures and medications based on a person's gender identity.
I'm watching the Iowa Senate debate on the state government reorganization bill. A couple of Democratic amendments have been voted down.
The Senate approved a GOP amendment that removed the proposal to change confirmation votes from 2/3 to 3/5 majority. legis.iowa.gov/dashboard?view…
One of the Dem amendments would have preserved independence of community-based corrections. Bill puts them under direct control of Dept of Corrections.
Another amendment would have kept vocational rehabilitation services in Dept of Education (they're moving to Workforce Devel)
Republicans voted down another amendment, which would have preserved State Board of Health. It's among the oldest state boards.
New health council would have only 1 health care professional (there are 7 on board of health).