Filed Date: Sept. 25, 2019
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
On September 25, 2019, Tulsa Women’s Reproductive Clinic, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, filed this lawsuit in an Oklahoma trial court challenging an Oklahoma law that forced doctors to tell patients that medication abortion can be “reversed” within 72 hours before their medication abortion appointment, a claim that is unsupported by scientific evidence. This law, S.B. 614, also required abortion providers to put up signs and inform patients of a website and 24-hour hotline for Heartbeat International’s “Abortion Pill Reversal Network.” Violations of S.B. 614 would be deemed a felony and subject to a $10,000 fine per day.
The clinic argued that this law violated the right to freedom of speech as afforded in the Oklahoma Constitution Article 2, Section 22 by forcing physicians to convey false information and non-medical statements they disagreed with. The lawsuit named as defendants the Attorney General of Oklahoma, the District Attorney for Tulsa County, the Oklahoma State of Medical Licensure and Supervision, the Oklahoma State Board of Osteopathic Examiners, and the Oklahoma State Board of Health. The plaintiff sought (1) declaratory judgment that S.B. 614 violated the Oklahoma Constitution and was void and of no effect, (2) permanent injunctive relief restricting the state from enforcing S.B. 614, and (3) attorney’s fees and costs. This case was assigned to Judge Don Andrews.
The clinic filed a motion for a temporary injunction on the same day the lawsuit was filed, and it was granted by the court on October 29, 2019, thereby restricting the state from enforcing S.B. 614 pending final resolution of the matter.
For almost two years, the parties proceeded with discovery. On August 30, 2021, the plaintiff amended its petition to also challenge provisions of S.B. 778 and 779 insofar that these new laws also required disclosures regarding abortion “reversal”. On October 1, 2021, the clinic filed a motion to expand the temporary injunction to include a prohibition on enforcing those sections of S.B. 778 and 779 and the next day, the court granted that expansion.
As of January 25, 2023, the case was ongoing, although the only activity on the docket since March 2022 has been withdrawal of counsel.
Summary Authors
Kathleen Lok (1/25/2023)
Andrews, Don (Oklahoma)
Bernstein, Lauren Jacobson (New York)
Citron, Eileen H (District of Columbia)
Citron, Eileen H (District of Columbia)
Cleveland, Bryan (Oklahoma)
Andrews, Don (Oklahoma)
Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 1:29 p.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Oklahoma
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Sept. 25, 2019
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Tusla Women’s Reproductive Clinic (a non-profit corporation providing reproductive healthcare in Oklahoma) and the physician who owns the clinic.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Attorney Organizations:
Center for Reproductive Rights
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
District Attorney (Tulsa), County
State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision, State
State Board of Osteopathic Examiners, State
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief:
Order Duration: 2019 - None
Content of Injunction:
Issues
Reproductive rights:
Reproductive health care (including birth control, abortion, and others)
Type of Facility: