Case: Northland Family Planning Center v. Nessel

24-000011-MM | Michigan state trial court

Filed Date: Feb. 6, 2024

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On February 6, 2024, abortion providers Northland Family Planning Center, Northland Family Planning Center Inc. East, and Northland Family Planning Center Inc., West (collectively, "Northland") and Medical Students for Choice ("MSFC") brought this lawsuit challenging abortion restrictions in the Michigan Court of Claims. The lawsuit challenged the state's 24-hour delay, mandatory counseling, and provider ban under the Michigan Constitution's fundamental right to reproductive freedom and nondisc…

On February 6, 2024, abortion providers Northland Family Planning Center, Northland Family Planning Center Inc. East, and Northland Family Planning Center Inc., West (collectively, "Northland") and Medical Students for Choice ("MSFC") brought this lawsuit challenging abortion restrictions in the Michigan Court of Claims. The lawsuit challenged the state's 24-hour delay, mandatory counseling, and provider ban under the Michigan Constitution's fundamental right to reproductive freedom and nondiscrimination clause. Northland and MSFC sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys' fees. 

Represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights and private counsel, plaintiffs sued the Michigan Attorney General, the Acting Director of Michigan Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, and the Director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. The case was assigned to Judge Sima Patel.

On the same day, February 6, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction and requested oral argument. On February 27, the Michigan Attorney General, Dana Nessel, filed a response. She did not oppose entering an injunction against the 24-hour delay, mandatory counseling, and provider ban provisions of the challenged statutes, but requested the court narrow the scope of the requested injunction so that other provisions would not be enjoined. The Department of Attorney General "erected a conflict wall" in the case, and a separate team of attorneys representing the State of Michigan is anticipated to intervene in the lawsuit to defend the challenged statute.  

The court granted in part plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction on June 25, 2024. Specifically, the court preliminarily enjoined the mandatory 24-hour waiting period, the mandatory informed consent, and the ban on advanced practice clinicians (APCs) providing abortion care. Under current Michigan law, only a licensed physician could provide abortion care, precluding APCs, including nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, and physician assistants, from performing abortions. The court found that plaintiffs demonstrated a high likelihood of success of establishing that the restrictions burdened and infringed upon a patient's freedom to make and effectuate decisions about abortion care without a compelling government interest. The court did not grant plaintiffs' motion as to the Michigan Department Health and Human Service's screening tools, protocols, and notices regarding coercion and domestic violence. 

This case is ongoing.   

Summary Authors

Avery Coombe (3/10/2024)

Hannah Juge (6/30/2024)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

24-00011

Verified Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Feb. 6, 2024

Feb. 6, 2024

Complaint

24-00011

Opinion and Order

Michigan state appellate court

June 25, 2024

June 25, 2024

Order/Opinion

Docket

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory:

Michigan

Case Type(s):

Healthcare Access and Reproductive Issues

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 6, 2024

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Northland Family Planning Center Inc., Northland Family Planning Center Inc., East, and Northland Family Planning Center Inc. West (collectively, “Northland Family Planning Center”) are Michigan reproductive healthcare clinics. Medical Students for Choice is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated ensuring that reproductive healthcare is a standard part of medical education and training.

Attorney Organizations:

Center for Reproductive Rights

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

State

Acting Director of Michigan Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

Attorney General of Michigan

Director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)

Other Dockets:

Michigan state trial court 24-000011-MM

Available Documents:

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Relief Granted:

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Issues

Reproductive rights:

Abortion

Counseling (reproductive rights)

Licensing restriction

Mandatory delay

Reproductive health care (including birth control, abortion, and others)