Posted on 10/15/2026 4:45:36 PM PDT by Morgana
In Access Independent Health Services v. Wrigley, abortion providers and physicians challenged North Dakota’s abortion law. They argued that the North Dakota Constitution protects a right to abortion and that the law’s exceptions were too unclear for doctors to know when they could legally provide an abortion.
The district court agreed with the challengers and struck down the law. The state appealed, bringing the case to the North Dakota Supreme Court.
Justice Jerod Tufte played a central role in the Supreme Court’s decision. In an extensive opinion joined by Chief Justice Jon Jensen, he rejected the argument that the state Constitution protects a broad right to abortion. He examined the Constitution’s text and the meaning North Dakotans would have understood when they adopted it in 1889. He also concluded that the law did not violate the Constitution’s due process protections.
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Jerod Tufte, joined by Chief Justice Jon Jensen, wrote that the state constitution did not broadly protect abortion rights.
Justice Tufte noted that North Dakota Constitution limits legislation from infringing on natural and inalienable rights, but only as those rights were understood at the time North Dakotans ratified the constitution.
The “fundamental right” of abortion “was apparently overlooked by every person alive when [the Constitution] was adopted and by almost everyone else in the time since,” wrote Justice Tufte. “The fact that it took more than a century for [the Constitution] to be asserted against any of the statutes criminalizing abortion refutes any notion that the language ‘defending life and liberty’ or ‘pursuing and obtaining safety’ plainly limits state regulation of abortion.”
The justices were closely divided. Three members concluded that the law was unconstitutionally vague. Justice Tufte and Chief Justice Jensen concluded that it was not unconstitutional. The North Dakota Constitution requires at least four votes to strike down a law. Since that threshold was not reached, the Supreme Court reversed the district court’s ruling, and the law was not declared unconstitutional.
For supporters of the law, the result was a significant victory. Justice Tufte’s opinion helped lead the way by explaining why, in his view, the Constitution did not establish a right to abortion and why the Legislature’s law should remain in effect. The close vote also shows how much can turn on the reasoning and votes of individual justices
This is an informational highlight of Justice Tufte’s work in this case, not an endorsement of Justice Tufte.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Much more sensible than the argument in Mass where the argument is against abortion up until term
Life begins at conception. That’s all
Exactly.
If I understand the article correctly, the state supreme court decision was actually 3 to 2 in favor of declaring the law unconstitutional but that the state constitution requires that four justices are needed to declare a law unconstitutional. Thus, although the majority were in favor of declaring the law unconstitutional the ruling did not meet the supermajority threshold and the law stands. Is this correct?
AI:
(Or just tell the guy, ‘get lost’, how difficult is that?
“Abortion is illegal in North Dakota following a North Dakota Supreme Court ruling that reinstated the state’s 2023 near-total ban.
Legal Status and Penalties
• Total Ban: Abortion is banned at all stages of pregnancy.
• Criminal Charges: Performing an abortion is classified as a Class C felony for doctors.
• Penalties: Providers face up to 5 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.
• Patient Immunity: Pregnant patients are legally protected from prosecution under the statute.
• Providers: There are currently no active abortion providers in North Dakota; the state’s former clinic relocated to Moorhead, Minnesota.
Exceptions
Abortions are permitted under narrow conditions:
• Life and Health: To prevent the death of the pregnant person or a serious physical health risk (psychological conditions do not qualify).
• Rape and Incest: Up to the first 6 weeks of gestation.
Additional Restrictions
• Waiting Period & Counseling: A 24-hour waiting period and state-directed counseling are mandated.
• Medication Abortion: Requires an in-person physician visit to administer the first dose on-site.
• Minors: Parental consent or judicial authorization is required for minors seeking care.
• Insurance and Funding: Public funding and private health insurance coverage for abortion care are prohibited except in rare circumstances.
This action means that the innocent unborn are safe for the time being.
I wonder how the three justices would rule if someone smashed a spotted owl egg.
EC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.