The Jackson Women’s Health Clinic filed suit against the state within an hour of Monday’s signing. This ban prohibits abortions before the 15th week. The Mississippi’s only abortion provider, the clinic argued that banning abortions at this early stage violated a woman’s constitutional rights to an abortion before the fetus can be viable. The plaintiffs requested a temporary restraining orders that evening. They stated that a woman in her 15th-week of pregnancy was scheduled to have an abortion on Tuesday at 2 p.m. U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves sided with the plaintiffs and issued a temporary restraining orders on the law for ten days. The law “threatens Mississippians’ ability to control their destiny and… bodies immediately, irreparably.” This is particularly true for a woman who was scheduled to have an abortion at 15 weeks. Reeves stated in his order that a brief delay in the enforcement of a law of questionable constitutionality does no more than the harm and actually serves the public’s interests in preserving freedom guaranteed under the United States Constitution. The court will decide in 10 days whether to issue a preliminary order against the law. This would prevent it from becoming effective until the court has determined its constitutionality. Since 2012, the governor has been vocal in his support of restricting abortion. The court will decide whether to enter a preliminary injunction on the law. This would prevent it from taking effect until the court has determined its constitutionality. Bryant sent an email Tuesday afternoon stating that he was confident in the constitution and would vigorously defend it. He tweeted shortly before Tuesday’s hearing, “I pray that we have saved the life of the first Mississippi unborn child.” The Jackson Women’s Health Clinic can perform abortions up to the 16th week. It performed these procedures on Tuesday and Monday this week. The clinic argued that if the procedure was delayed even one week, then the woman who has the 2 p.m. appointment will be unable to obtain an abortion in Mississippi. This would violate her constitutional rights. Rob McDuff, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, stated that “irreparable harm” exists not only today but over the next few weeks for women in Mississippi. A ban on abortions prior to 20 weeks of gestation has never been achieved in any other state. This is generally the earliest point of viability for a foetus. In Supreme Court cases before, constitutionality hinged on two factors: whether the fetus can be viable and whether restrictions on abortion prior to that point of viability are an “undue burden” for the woman seeking an abortion. Courts have overturned laws that are deemed to place undue burden. Even though Tuesday’s hearing was limited to the motion for temporary restraining orders, it provided a glimpse of what will likely be a long constitutional battle as supporters of the ban tried to discredit the notion that a viable foetus is the only thing that can outweigh a woman’s right of abortion. Paul Barnes, the special assistant attorney general, suggested in his arguments that fetal viability could now be earlier than 23 weeks. This echos arguments made by some legislators earlier this month. Barnes stated that he is confident that he will be able show proof that the law protects at least some viable fetuses. The new law does not affect pregnancies past 20 weeks. This is because the old state law forbade abortions. Before 20 weeks, no fetus survived outside of the womb. Barnes suggested that viability is “constantly moving,” and that although a fetus may not be technically viable at 15 weeks, it should still be considered. Reeves noted that the court precedent sets a strict line about viability. Reeves asked, “Where there’s no viability does the state’s rights to protect that foetus over a woman’s ability to make her own decisions about her body?” Mississippi’s ban doesn’t apply to abortions performed prior to 15 weeks. However, abortion advocates argue that banning pre-viability abortions could make all abortions illegal. A bill to ban abortions at 15 week gestation was also introduced by a member from the Louisiana House last month. Evidence also suggests that conservative groups in the U.S. are watching Mississippi closely. Yesterday’s bill signing was attended by representatives from the American Family Association. This is a Christian fundamentalist group. Jameson Taylor, Mississippi Center for Public Policy, stated that the bill was vetted by the Alliance Defending Freedom in Arizona. Other organizations also reviewed the language. Bob Trent, a spokesperson of Alliance Defending Freedom, stated that “Occasionally lawmakers ask ADF lawyers to review the constitution of proposed legislation. ADF supports the states’ legitimate and important efforts to protect the safety and health of women and children. Alliance Defending Freedom was also a key player in defending Mississippi House Bill 1523 (also known as the Protecting Freedom of Conscience From Government Discrimination Act). This bill was passed two years ago. ADF also includes the American Family Association. Reeves seems to have noted the importance of setting the ban at fifteen weeks, which is early enough to start a Mississippi court case. The Jackson Women’s Health Clinic does not perform abortions beyond the 16th week, which is why no one else in the state could challenge a later ban. Reeves inquired, “Did they explain why they went for 15 week when the state unilaterally does not provide abortions after 16? Barnes admitted that he did not know the reason the state selected 15 weeks. However, he said that the one-week difference meant that the law would not affect many unborn children. Mississippi performs approximately 2000 abortions each year. Only 78 of these were performed in 2017, after the 15th week. Barnes stated that there are not hundreds of abortions every year and that this will never stop. Barnes said, however, that the state had many other interests than the life of the foetus. Barnes reversed McDuff’s argument and argued that abortion was more likely to cause irreparable harm than denying it. “The clinic does not perform abortions after the 16th weeks. Barnes stated that abortions are more risky and more complex because they increase in complexity with the gestational age. Barnes said that they have tacitly admitted part of our argument by citing a report from American College of Obsetrics, which showed that abortion risks increase with the gestational ages of a fetus. These findings were not disputed by the plaintiffs, but they argued that even late-term abortion poses far less health risk to women than childbirth. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine released a study on Friday that found abortion to be one of the most safe surgical procedures in America. McDuff said that the argument that the risk of abortion increases with the gestational age was a way to undermine the right to abort. McDuff stated that if the argument is legitimate, the state could continue to reduce abortion until it is abolished. McDuff stated that viability increases at week 12, it rises at week 6, and it goes up at week zero. They could also completely ban abortion. However, the state’s interest to protect maternal health was still central to the case against the temporary restraining orders. Barnes argued that abortion restrictions before the point is viable had been upheld by appellate courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. He cited Gonzales V. Carhart from 2007, a 2007 case which banned certain types of abortion before fetal viability. The court ruled that they were not necessary for the woman’s health. McDuff called McDuff’s arguments for women’s health to be protected a backdoor method of controlling their behavior. McDuff stated that the law was intended to stop women making their own decisions and force them to bear their pregnancies. McDuff said that the Supreme Court repeatedly declared this law unconstitutional. This one will have to be struck again. This is an undue burden. “This is a ban.” Barnes argued that while the plaintiffs had the burden of proof for a restraining order, it was the state who was responsible. Reeves challenged Barnes to give a scientific or constitutional basis for his arguments. The abortion bill itself outlines a variety of health risks associated with abortion. Reeves was concerned about the law’s findings and asked if there had been a public hearing or if he could refer to the logic behind the claims. Barnes pointed out the American College of Obstetrics study, but stated that he did not know of any hearings. Reeves asked, “But what evidence do you have other than this study?” “Should i give the legislature that much respect?” I do not know if any doctors were present and gave evidence at the hearing. I don’t know if there was. There is a lot of stuff that happens at that Legislature that shouldn’t happen.” Advocates of the 15-week ban often argue that 75 percent countries don’t allow abortion after the first 12 weeks of a pregnancy. Barnes reiterated this statistic, stating that Mississippi was simply trying to bring its law up-to-international standards. Reeves didn’t buy it. “Does this state often look at what other countries do to decide legislation? Reeves laughed and said that it was rare for Mississippi to look to other countries for advice. To support this important work, you can make a regular donation to us today as we celebrate our Spring Member Drive.