Case: Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, Inc. v. Hilgers

This lawsuit challenged a Nebraska state law (L.B. 574) that imposed a twelve-week abortion ban and prohibited gender-affirming care for transgender youth under nineteen years of age.

On July 19, 2023, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, Inc. and its medical doctor, abortion service providers in Nebraska, filed the lawsuit, represented by the ACLU of Nebraska and the ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, in the District Court of Lancaster County, Nebraska. The Plaintiffs sued the Attorney General for the State of Nebraska, the Governor of the State of Nebraska, Chief Executive Officer of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, the Director of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services Division of Public Health, and the Chief Medical Officer of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services. Plaintiffs alleged that L.B. 574 violates the Nebraska Constitution’s single-subject requirement (Art. III, § 14). Plaintiffs sought declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees.

On June 2, 2023 the Defendants filed a motion to dismiss and announced that they intended to convert their motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment, whereas on June 9, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed a cross motion for summary judgment. However, the court rejected the Defendant’s argument that the single-subject requirement is a non-justiciable political question.

The court held a hearing on the motions on July 19, 2024. At this hearing, the Plaintiffs no longer objected to the Defendants’ motion to dismiss on procedural grounds. The parties treated the motion to dismiss as one for summary judgment and the court did the same. 

On August 11, 2023, Judge Lori A. Maret sustained Defendants' motion to dismiss and overruled the Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary injunction and cross motion for summary judgment. The court held that (i) the doctor plaintiff does not have standing because any injury she will suffer is speculative; (ii) L.B. 574 does not violate the legislative single-subject rule because its general purpose is health care and all parts of L.B. 574 are relevant to health care; and (iii) the single-subject requirement is a justiciable question.

The Plaintiffs filed an appeal to Nebraska Supreme Court, whereas the Defendants cross-appealed with respect to the court’s finding on the justiciability of the single-subject requirement. The Clearinghouse at this time does not have the exact dates.

On July 26, 2024, the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the District Court by finding that L.B. 574 does not violate the constitution’s prohibition on bills that contain more than one subject because both issues of L.B. 574 (abortion and gender-altering care) relate to regulation of medical care. The opinion was issued by Judge Heavican, C.J., and joined by Justices Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik, and Freudenberg. 

Justice Papik, joined by Justice Stacy, concurred in the judgment and said that in a future case the court may reconsider some of its precedents interpreting and applying Article III, § 14, and that he is open to overruling the cases that focus on a bill’s object or purpose in favor of an approach that is more consistent with Article III, § 14. Justice Miller-Lerman partly concurred, and partly dissented, in the judgment; he concurred with the conclusion of the majority that it is the court’s duty to review the constitutionality of the statute, but dissented with the part of the opinion declining to conclude that the second plaintiff, who performs abortions, does not have standing despite the finding that the “main purpose” of L.B. 574 is to regulate medical care. Additionally, Justice Miller-Lerman dissented from the majority opinion that concluded that L.B. 574 is constitutional because the abortion and gender-affirming care are not “one subject” but rather unrelated acts. 

The case is now closed.