Michigan
Protected
Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe:
Michiganders have approved Prop 3, which enshrines reproductive freedom in the Michigan constitution.
Restrictions
Michigan law generally prohibits abortion at the point of viability.[1]MICH. COMP. LAWS § 750.323. It also prohibits D&X procedures.[2]Id. § 750.90h. Pregnant people who seek abortion care must undergo a mandatory twenty-four-hour waiting period and biased counseling.[3]Id. § 333.17015. Michigan also limits public funding for abortion care[4]Id. § 400.109a. and restricts private insurance coverage.[5]See Abortion Insurance Opt-Out, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 550.541-551. Michigan law generally requires that a parent, legal guardian,[6]MICH. COMP. LAWS § 722.903. or judge[7]Id. § 722.904. consent to a minor’s abortion.
Michigan’s targeted regulation of abortion providers (TRAP) laws include requirements related to facilities,[8]Id. § 333.20115. and reporting.[9]Id. § 333.2835(2); Id § 333.2837(1). Michigan law restricts the provision of abortion care to physicians.[10]MICH. COMP. LAWS § 333.17015(1). Providers who violate Michigan’s abortion restrictions may face civil and criminal penalties.[11]See, e.g., id. §§ 722.907, 750.323.
State Protections
On November 8, 2022, voters in Michigan approved a constitutional amendment that enshrined reproductive freedom in the state constitution.[12]Repro. Freedom for All, mireproductivefreedom.org/ (last visited Oct. 6, 2022). Lindsay Whitehurst, Abortion rights protected in Michigan, California, Vermont, AP News (Nov. 9, 2022). It went into effect 45 days later.[13]MI CONST Art. 12, § 2. In December 2022, the governor directed the state government to identify ways to protect abortion access, including refusing to cooperate with other states that try to investigate or prosecute patients.[14]Exec. Dir. No. 2022-13 (Dec. 14, 2022). Previously, in Mahaffey v. Attorney General, the Court of Appeals of Michigan specifically held that that the state constitution adopted in 1963 does not “establish a constitutional right to abortion.”[15]564 N.W.2d 104, 110 (1997). The case further iterates that the public policy of the state is to ban abortion so long as the ban is narrowed to follow federal law.[16]Id. at 110-11 (citing People v. Bricker, 389 Mich. 524, 527-29, 208 N.W.2d 172, 174 (1973)).
The Governor of Michigan has issued executive orders that prohibit executive branch departments and agencies with enforcement responsibilities from providing assistance or cooperating with out-of-state investigations,[17]Mich. Exec. Order No. 2022-5 (May 25, 2022) www.michigan.gov/whitmer/news/state-orders-and-directives/2022/05/25/ed-2022-5-reproductive-rights-in-michigan. as well as a prohibition on the Office of the Governor from enforcing extraditions that arise from the provision of reproductive health care that is provided legally.[18]Mich. Exec. Order No. 2022-4 (Jul. 13, 2022) www.michigan.gov/whitmer/news/state-orders-and-directives/2022/07/13/executive-order-2022-4-unavailability-of-interstate-extradition.%5B/fn%5D As of 2023, … Continue reading Michigan protects clinic safety by prohibiting trespassing and harassment.[19]MICH. COMP. LAWS § 333.20198(1).
Post-Roe Prohibitions
In April 2023, Michigan repealed its pre-Roe ban, [20]H.B. 4006, 102nd Leg., Reg. Sess. (Mi. 2023), repealing §§ 750.14-15; S.B. 2, 102nd Leg., Reg. Sess. (M.I. 2023), repealing § 750.40. See also Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.323. People v. Bricker is the … Continue reading which had been permanently enjoined as unconstitutional.[21]Planned Parenthood of Mich. et. al. v. Att’y Gen. of Michigan, No. 22-00044-MM (Ct. Cl. Mich. Sep. 7, 2022)(finding that the ban violates the rights of bodily autonomy and personal autonomy … Continue reading
Conclusion
Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe, Michiganders have approved Prop 3, which enshrines reproductive freedom in the Michigan constitution.
References
↑1 | MICH. COMP. LAWS § 750.323. |
---|---|
↑2 | Id. § 750.90h. |
↑3 | Id. § 333.17015. |
↑4 | Id. § 400.109a. |
↑5 | See Abortion Insurance Opt-Out, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 550.541-551. |
↑6 | MICH. COMP. LAWS § 722.903. |
↑7 | Id. § 722.904. |
↑8 | Id. § 333.20115. |
↑9 | Id. § 333.2835(2); Id § 333.2837(1). |
↑10 | MICH. COMP. LAWS § 333.17015(1). |
↑11 | See, e.g., id. §§ 722.907, 750.323. |
↑12 | Repro. Freedom for All, mireproductivefreedom.org/ (last visited Oct. 6, 2022). Lindsay Whitehurst, Abortion rights protected in Michigan, California, Vermont, AP News (Nov. 9, 2022). |
↑13 | MI CONST Art. 12, § 2. |
↑14 | Exec. Dir. No. 2022-13 (Dec. 14, 2022). |
↑15 | 564 N.W.2d 104, 110 (1997). |
↑16 | Id. at 110-11 (citing People v. Bricker, 389 Mich. 524, 527-29, 208 N.W.2d 172, 174 (1973)). |
↑17 | Mich. Exec. Order No. 2022-5 (May 25, 2022) www.michigan.gov/whitmer/news/state-orders-and-directives/2022/05/25/ed-2022-5-reproductive-rights-in-michigan. |
↑18 | Mich. Exec. Order No. 2022-4 (Jul. 13, 2022) www.michigan.gov/whitmer/news/state-orders-and-directives/2022/07/13/executive-order-2022-4-unavailability-of-interstate-extradition.%5B/fn%5D As of 2023, discrimination based on pregnancy termination is prohibited in employment, housing, and public accommodations and education.[fn]S.B. 147, 102nd Leg., Reg. Sess. (Mi. 2023). |
↑19 | MICH. COMP. LAWS § 333.20198(1). |
↑20 | H.B. 4006, 102nd Leg., Reg. Sess. (Mi. 2023), repealing §§ 750.14-15; S.B. 2, 102nd Leg., Reg. Sess. (M.I. 2023), repealing § 750.40. See also Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.323. People v. Bricker is the chief case addressing the constitutionality of the complete pre-Roe ban. 389 Mich. 524, 527, 208 N.W.2d 172, 174 (1973). In 1973, the Michigan Supreme Court held that Michigan law must be read to be consistent with the United States Constitution and therefore that whatever pieces of the criminal abortion law remain constitutional under Roe are still binding law. In 2001, a Michigan appellate court held that the pre-Roe ban had not been repealed by implication. People v. Higuera, 244 Mich. App. 429, 435, 625 N.W.2d 444, 448 (2001). |
↑21 | Planned Parenthood of Mich. et. al. v. Att’y Gen. of Michigan, No. 22-00044-MM (Ct. Cl. Mich. Sep. 7, 2022)(finding that the ban violates the rights of bodily autonomy and personal autonomy protected by the Due Process Clause of the Michigan Constitution, art. 1, § 17, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Michigan Constitution, art. 1, § 2). |