Filed Date: Aug. 8, 2023
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
On August 8, 2023, a group of Alabama birth centers, their respective founders who were medical professionals, and the American College of Nurse-Midwives filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County (an Alabama state trial court). The complaint was filed against Alabama Department of Public Health (“ADPH”) and the State Health Officer for their actions that allegedly amounted to de facto ban on freestanding birth centers throughout the state, preventing three such birth centers from providing pregnancy care for patients. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU, alleged that ADPH required that state birth centers hold a “hospital” license, despite birthing centers operating on a midwifery model of care that does not fall within the regulation’s definition of “hospital.” The plaintiffs contended that ADPH made it impossible for birth centers to even attempt to obtain such a license and caused harm by threatening criminal and civil enforcement action for being “unlicensed hospitals.” As such, the complaint alleged that ADPH’s actions exceeded statutory authority under the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act and violated the plaintiffs’ due process right to pursue useful activities under the Alabama Constitution by preventing them from owning, operating, and/or working at a freestanding birth center. The plaintiffs further alleged violations of the fundamental right to procreate under both the Alabama and U.S. Constitutions. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The case was assigned to Judge Greg Griffin.
On September 30, 2023, after hearing oral argument in late September, Judge Griffin granted the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction and enjoined the defendants from refusing to timely license freestanding birth centers. This preliminary injunction order was supplemented with findings of facts on October 3, 2023, reasoning that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims as well as immediate and irreparable injury.
ADPH passed further regulations, which took effect on October 15, 2023. In response, the plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive relief on January 19, 2024. The plaintiffs alleged that “[f]ar from creating a timely, feasible path to licensure, Defendants’ recent birth center regulations…continued to block freestanding birth centers from opening and operating in Alabama.” The plaintiffs added a claim regarding violations of due process and equal protection under both the state and federal constitutions, as well, for they claimed the additional 2023 regulations a) deprived the plaintiffs of their protectible property interest and b) treated differently, and without rational basis, the plaintiffs and individuals who established, operated, or worked in similarly situated health care facilities. The case remains ongoing.
On February 29, defendants filed a motion to dismiss five of plaintiffs' thirteen claims; all five claims alleged that the regulations exceeded statutory authority in violation of the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act ("AAPA"). After briefing from both parties and hearing oral argument on April 29, the court denied defendants' motion to dismiss on June 4. The court held that Claims One, Two, and Five sufficiently state claims upon which relief can be granted and that Claim Four was not rendered mute. Lastly, defendants had dropped their motion to dismiss the Third Claim at oral argument -- having originally argued that plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies -- so the court denied the motion to dismiss the Claim Three.
As of December 2024, the case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Kavitha Babu (4/7/2024)
Avery Coombe (12/22/2024)
Renuka Wagh (12/29/2024)
State / Territory: Alabama
Case Type(s):
Healthcare Access and Reproductive Issues
Key Dates
Filing Date: Aug. 8, 2023
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
A group of Alabama birthing centers, medical professionals, and the American College of Nurse-Midwives
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public (for-profit) corporation
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Alabama Department of Public Health, State
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Procedural Due Process
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief:
Content of Injunction:
Order Duration: 2023 - None
Issues
Reproductive rights:
Reproductive health care (including birth control, abortion, and others)