Ohio Attorney General appeals judge's decision on ‘heartbeat bill’

The Ohio Attorney General will appeal a judge's decision that permanently blocked the state's six-week abortion ban.

In October, an Ohio county judge decided that the heartbeat bill was unconstitutional. The decision said “To give meaning to the voice of Ohio’s voters, the amendment must be given full effect, and laws such as those enacted by S.B. 23 must be permanently enjoined.”

This decision is being appealed.

A spokesperson for the Ohio Attorney General's office sent the following statement:

“Seeking appellate review is a necessary and appropriate step. The state respects the will of the people regarding the six-week abortion ban, but the state is also obligated to protect provisions in Senate Bill 23, as passed by the General Assembly and signed by the governor, that the constitutional amendment does not address. It is up to the courts to determine how conflicts between those two documents are resolved.”

Former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann agrees that some provisions in the bill might not be ruled as unconstitutional if pursued.

“There are provisions of the bill that might pass muster under the constitution and I'm not suggesting that he shouldn't pursue some of those parts of the claim, but as they have to do with the doctors visit a day ahead of the time for example,” said Dann, managing partner for the Dann Law Firm. ”The question is, is it a reasonable restriction on somebody's constitutional rights.”

Even so, Dann feels an appeal to the judge's decision has no legal grounds.

“It's the attorney general's job to defend the statutes that the Ohio General Assembly passes, but this one is completely unconstitutional without question based on the amendment based on the Ohio amendment that was passed last year,” said Dann.

The process of appealing a ruling like this could take years.

“With a constitutional issue like this, there would be a question of whether the Supreme Court would decide to take the case. They have the option of taking it or not taking it. So there will be a period of briefing over whether the supreme court will take it or not. And if the Supreme Court handles it, you’re talking about a couple years with leaving people with uncertainty,” said Dann.

An injunction is in place, meaning the judge's ruling on the bill stands during the appeal process.