Status: After a Georgia state court ruled in September 2024 to permanently block the state’s six-week abortion ban, declaring the ban unconstitutional under the Georgia constitution’s fundamental right to privacy, Georgia’s Attorney General appealed the ruling to the Georgia Supreme Court, which then reinstated the ban while the case proceeds at the Court. On February 20, 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated the district court’s ruling and remanded the case to the district court for reconsideration of the plaintiffs’ standing to bring their claims.

Summary

Summary

In SisterSong v. State of Georgia, the Center for Reproductive Rights and its partners filed a state constitutional challenge seeking to block H.B. 481, which bans abortion after approximately six weeks of pregnancy, from taking effect. The lawsuit, filed on July 26, 2022, asserted that the six-week abortion ban violates the Georgia Constitution’s robust protection for the fundamental right to privacy, which is independent of the U.S. Constitution.  

The lawsuit also argued that H.B. 481 is unconstitutional because it clearly violated Roe v. Wade when enacted in 2019, making it void from inception, regardless of the subsequent change to federal law. Georgia’s constitution provides that a law that violates either the state or federal constitution when passed is forever void. 

The Center and its partners first challenged H.B. 481 in Sistersong v. Kemp (2019), shortly after Gov. Brian Kemp signed the ban into law. In 2020, a federal district court blocked the ban from taking effect. But after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the federal district court’s injunction, allowing the ban to take effect on July 20, 2022. 

On August 15, the Superior Court of Fulton County ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to temporarily block H.B. 481 before deciding its constitutionality on the merits, allowing the ban to remain in effect as litigation continued. On October 24–25, the Superior Court heard the parties’ evidence in the trial on plaintiffs’ challenge to H.B. 481. 

On November 15, Judge Robert McBurney of the Superior Court of Fulton County struck down the ban as void and without legal basis since it violated Roe v. Wade when it was enacted in 2019.  

Judge McBurney further found that a subsequent change in federal constitutional law, which happened when the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Roe, does not revive the ban. Instead, if the legislature wishes to ban abortion, it must pass a new law “in the sharp glare of public attention that will undoubtedly and properly attend such an important and consequential debate,” Judge McBurney wrote in his order. 

Just a week later, on November 23, the Georgia Supreme Court granted an emergency stay of the injunction, allowing the ban to take effect once again while the state’s appeal continues. 

On October 24, 2023, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s ruling that the law was void from inception, allowing the ban to remain in effect. The case was returned to the trial court to rule on the remaining claims brought by the plaintiffs that the ban violates Georgians’ rights to privacy and equal protection under the state constitution.

Ban ruled unconstitutional

Ban ruled unconstitutional by Georgia State Court

The Superior Court of Fulton County ruled on September 30 that Georgia’s six-week abortion ban is unconstitutional and that abortion is protected under the state constitution’s fundamental right to privacy. The ruling permanently blocks the ban, which prohibits abortion before many know they’re pregnant, and allows Georgians to once again access abortion care in the state beyond the earliest weeks of pregnancy.     

In its ruling, the court held that:

1. The state constitution’s strong protection of the fundamental right to privacy prohibits political interference with an individual’s abortion decision before viability.
2. The exclusion of mental health from the ban’s narrow medical emergency exception violates equal protection.
3. Another provision of the law giving district attorneys broad access to the medical records of abortion patients also violates Georgians’ right to privacy.

Judge McBurney also wrote:

• “[F]or many women, their pregnancy was unintended, unexpected, and often unknown until well after the embryonic heartbeat began.  Yet that’s too late under the LIFE Act’s strictures: these women are now forbidden from undoing that life-altering change of circumstances — before they even knew the change had occurred. For these women, the liberty of privacy means that they alone should choose whether they serve as human incubators for the five months leading up to viability.”
• “Considering the compelling record evidence about the physical, mental, and emotional impact of unwanted pregnancies on the women who are forced by law to carry them to term (as well as on their other living children), the Court finds that, until the pregnancy is viable, a woman’s right to make decisions about her body and her health remains private and protected, i.e., remains her business and her business alone.”
• “[T[here is an uncomfortable and usually unspoken subtext of involuntary servitude swirling about this debate, symbolically illustrated by the composition of the legal teams in this case. It is generally men who promote and defend laws like the LIFE Act, the effect of which is to require only women — and, given the socio-economic and demographic evidence presented at trial, primarily poor women, which means in Georgia primarily black and brown women — to engage in compulsory labor, i.e., the carrying of a pregnancy to term at the Government’s behest.” 

Ban reinstated

Georgia Supreme Court reinstates ban pending appeal

Georgia’s Attorney General filed an appeal of the ruling on October 2, asking the Georgia Supreme Court to reinstate the ban. On October 7, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled to reinstate the six-week ban while the case proceeds at the Court. The Supreme Court left in place for now the trial court’s ruling blocking a separate provision of the law giving state prosecutors broad access to the medical records of abortion patients absent any due process protections (like notice to the patient or a subpoena). This part of the ruling is unrelated to the ban itself.

Since going into effect, H.B. 481 has denied Georgians the freedom to make personal medical decisions during pregnancy and forced patients into life-threatening situations. Last month, Georgia’s expert Maternal Mortality Review Committee determined that the deaths of two Black women in 2022 — Amber Nicole Thurman and Candi Miller — were “preventable” but that the patients were not able to access the urgent medical care they needed due to confusion and fear of criminal penalties for violating the state’s abortion ban.

“Today, the Georgia Supreme Court sided with anti-abortion extremists. Every minute this harmful six-week abortion ban is in place, Georgians suffer. Denying our community members the lifesaving care they deserve jeopardizes their lives, safety, and health—all for the sake of power and control over our bodies,” said Monica Simpson, executive director of plaintiff SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective about the Court’s ruling.

Georgians directly harmed by the six-week ban shared their stories in an amicus brief submitted to the Court in January.

On February 20, 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated the district court’s ruling and remanded the case to the district court for reconsideration of the plaintiffs’ standing to bring their claims.

Case details Related stories Timeline Press releases