Skip to content
Center for Reproductive Rights
Center for Reproductive Rights

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • The Center’s Impact
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Annual Reports
    • Corporate Engagement
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • Cases Archive
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Global Advocacy
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Stories
    • Events
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Press Releases
    • Statements
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • U.S. Abortion Rights: Resources
    • Maps
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
    • Repro Red Flags: Agency Watch
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Become a Monthly Donor
    • Make a Donor Advised Fund Gift
    • Leave a Legacy Gift
    • Donate Gifts of Stock
    • Give a Gift in Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Employee Matching Gifts
    • Mail a Check
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Donate
icon-hamburger icon-magnifying-glass Donate
icon-magnifying-glass-teal

Michigan 1800s-Era Abortion Ban Struck Down  

Center for Reproductive Rights - Center for Reproductive Rights - search logo
search Close Close icon
Center for Reproductive Rights -
Menu Close Menu Close icon
Donate

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • The Center’s Impact
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Annual Reports
    • Corporate Engagement
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • Cases Archive
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Global Advocacy
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Stories
    • Events
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Press Releases
    • Statements
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • U.S. Abortion Rights: Resources
    • Maps
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
    • Repro Red Flags: Agency Watch
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Become a Monthly Donor
    • Make a Donor Advised Fund Gift
    • Leave a Legacy Gift
    • Donate Gifts of Stock
    • Give a Gift in Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Employee Matching Gifts
    • Mail a Check
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn

Related Content

Issues:

Abortion, Legal Restrictions

Regions:

United States

Work:

In the Courts

Type:

News, Story

Case Archive

For updates on Center cases, explore our case archive here.

Follow the Center

Donate Now

Join Now

09.15.2022

In the Courts Abortion United States Story

Michigan 1800s-Era Abortion Ban Struck Down  

Virginia Sobol
A “friend of the court” brief filed by the Center on behalf of Mothering Justice and partners challenged the ban enacted before women and Black, Indigenous and other people of color had the right to vote.

Share

  • facebook
  • Twitter
  • linkedin
  • Email id
Eric Kayne/AP Images for the Center for Reproductive Rights

On September 7, the Michigan Court of Claims issued a permanent injunction striking down the state’s pre-Roe abortion ban, which it held violates the right to bodily integrity and equal protection under Michigan’s constitution.  

The decision came after the Center for Reproductive Rights filed an amicus brief in the Michigan Court of Claims and Michigan Supreme Court on behalf of Mothering Justice, Northland Family Planning, Medical Students for Choice, and the Center for Black Maternal Health and Reproductive Justice at Tufts University School of Medicine. The brief, filed August 18, argues that the state’s 1800s-era abortion ban violates Michigan’s constitution because, among other substantive claims, it discriminates on the basis of race.   

The Michigan Legislature passed the ban in 1846—when women and Black, Indigenous, and other people of color were deprived of the right to vote and subject to a slew of discriminatory policies—and revised it in 1931. The ban would have made it a felony for providers to perform abortions in all instances except to preserve the life of the mother. Anti-abortion state lawmakers have attempted to enforce the pre-Roe ban in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June revoking the constitutional right to abortion.  

Read the brief filed by the Center.

Amicus Brief Challenging Michigan’s Pre-Roe Abortion Ban

Among its several claims, the brief argues that the state’s abortion ban violates Michigan’s constitution because it discriminates on the basis of race.

In her decision to strike down the ban, the judge held that the Michigan Constitution’s Due Process Clause is more expansive than the parallel clause in the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The judge noted that “[a]lmost a century, two world wars, a constitutional amendment granting women the right to vote, the emergence of a civil rights movement, and a sea change in laws regarding women’s status” separated the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 and the ratification of Michigan’s constitution in 1963. As such, she concluded that the federal Due Process Clause bears “little resemblance to the understanding of personal freedom, particularly for women and people of color, motivating those who drafted and ratified our 1963 Constitution.”   

The judge also recognized that the abortion ban would have deprived women not only of autonomous decision-making over their bodies and medical care, but of the ability to decide when and under what conditions to have children. The Michigan law “controls her ability to be the mother she wants to be,” the judge wrote in the decision. “The statute not only compels motherhood and its attendant responsibilities; it wipes away the mother’s ability to make the plans she considers most beneficial for the futures of her existing and desired children.” 

The judge noted that “particularly helpful briefs filed by amici curiae” informed her decision to find the abortion ban unconstitutional. The Court applied the compelling reason test outlined in the Center’s brief in holding that the scope of the Michigan Constitution is broader than the U.S. Constitution. As the judge explained, the compelling reasons test enables Michigan courts to “interpret provisions of Michigan’s Constitution independently of the Supreme Court of the United States, both to protect Michiganders’ individual rights, and when ‘compelling reasons’ supports doing so.” 

Brief Filed in Support of Planned Parenthood Lawsuit 

In April, Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit in the Michigan Court of Claims challenging the constitutionality of the state’s ban. Governor Whitmer also filed a lawsuit in April, asking the Michigan Supreme Court to decide the legality of the ban and to rule that the state constitution protects the right to abortion. The Michigan Supreme Court has not yet said whether it will hear Governor Whitmer’s case, though it has sought supplemental briefing and accepted a “friend of the court” brief from the Center. 

The brief’s co-signers outline how the near-total abortion ban would disproportionately restrict Black people’s reproductive autonomy, exacerbating health disparities and entrenching cycles of poverty. The brief argues that the collective protections afforded by the Michigan Constitution for equality, liberty, and freedom from government restraint, including the unique and broad protections against race-based discrimination, must be read together to protect the rights of people living at the intersection of sex, race, and poverty-based discrimination. 

Michigan Ban Would Violate the State Constitution’s Protection Against Racial Discrimination 

The brief submitted notes that the Michigan Constitution has stronger protections against racial discrimination than the U.S. Constitution. While the word “discriminate” does not appear in the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Michigan Constitution guarantees that no person shall “be denied the enjoyment of his civil or political rights or be discriminated against in the exercise thereof because of religion, race, color or national origin.”  

Read more.

The Center’s Amicus Work

The Center files “friend of the court” amicus briefs in cases with the ability to inform and influence legal precedent on reproductive rights, constitutional law, and international law.

The amici write that the ban “discriminates against members of a protected class because it disproportionately impacts Black pregnant people’s ability to make autonomous decisions about their reproductive health and lives, imposing devastating health harms and economic hardships on Black communities.” For this reason, the brief argues that Michigan’s 1800s-era pre-Roe abortion ban violates the state constitution’s prohibition against racial discrimination. 

Eboni Taylor, Michigan Executive Director of Mothering Justice, an advocacy organization that co-signed the brief, said, “Protecting the right to bodily autonomy, especially for pregnant and birthing people of color, is not only the common-sense approach but also one of preservation, where the unraveling of other rights that mothers of color would be disproportionately impacted by is diminished.”  

“Abortion bans are without a doubt archaic and a very poignant flashback to Black women’s forced pregnancies in chattel slavery, so the time we’re in marks a continuation of the inability of Black women and pregnant people to choose,” Taylor added. “To that end, we vehemently stand with Gov. Whitmer and our partners in supporting legislation that protects the health and bodily autonomy of pregnant and birthing people in Michigan.”  

Ban Would Disproportionately Harm Low-income, Black and Indigenous Communities  

The Center for Black Maternal Health and Reproductive Justice at Tufts University School of Medicine, which also co-signed the brief, warned that by forcing people to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, the ban would exacerbate existing health and economic disparities, especially for low-income, Black and Indigenous communities.  

The brief supports this point with the following evidence: 

  • The United States is the only country in the world with an advanced economy where the maternal mortality ratio is worsening, according to the World Health Organization. In Detroit, the maternal mortality rate is three times the national average. 
  • Black pregnant people in the U.S. face heightened maternal mortality risks due to structural racism, systemic poverty, provider bias, and inadequate access to prenatal and post-natal care. 
  • Black women experience the highest rates of maternal mortality in Michigan, with Black women 4.5 times more likely to die than white women.  
  • Michigan’s ban would compound systemic health disparities experienced by Black communities in the state, including those caused by the Flint water crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic.  

The brief also contends that Michigan’s ban would perpetuate economic inequality and further entrench poverty across the state, with disproportionate impacts on Black communities. 

  • Michigan’s ban would reinforce cyclical poverty. Amici note that structural inequities including systemic barriers to contraception lead people with lower incomes to experience disproportionately higher rates of unintended pregnancy. People living in poverty comprise about 75% of people who have abortions in the United States. 
  • Forcing people to give birth would compel them to raise children under inequitable circumstances. As the brief notes, studies show that children born to women who have been denied an abortion are more likely to live below federal poverty guidelines than children born in a subsequent pregnancy to women who received the abortion. 
  • The economic impact of Michigan’s ban would heighten racial health disparities. Black infants in Michigan already face lower survival rates than white infants, due in part to the Flint water crisis.  

Amici write that for Black communities, Michigan’s pre-Roe ban would worsen infant health outcomes and “exacerbate an already fragile state of food insecurity, financial distress, barriers to healthcare and stable housing, diminishing any hope of intergenerational wealth.” 

Ban Would Also Jeopardize Accreditation of Medical Residency Programs 

Medical Students for Choice, which also co-signed the brief, warned that the abortion ban could potentially jeopardize the accreditation of medical residency programs in the state and “discourage medical students and physicians from all practice areas from joining Michigan medical schools and programs.” The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society of Family Medicine require that accredited OB/GYN programs provide students with training in abortion care.  

The brief was filed by the Center’s Senior Counsel Genevieve Scott, Staff Attorney Kulsoom Ijaz, Legal Fellow Astrid Ackerman, and David A. Moran of the University of Michigan.  

Click here to read the full amicus brief. 

Tags: Michigan, pre-roe abortion ban, michigan constitution, michigan abortion ban, amicus brief, state abortion ban

Related Posts

State Court Abortion Litigation Tracker Launched by the Center for Reproductive Rights and the Brennan Center for Justice

Tool aggregates litigation against abortion bans in state courts since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

Abortion, Legal Restrictions,United States,In the Courts, In the States (USA)
State Court Abortion Litigation Tracker Launched by the Center for Reproductive Rights and the Brennan Center for Justice

The Center and Movement Partners Urge Court to Block Unprecedented Ruling Rejecting FDA’s Approval of Abortion Drug

Amicus brief of more than 100 reproductive rights, health, and justice partners highlights the proven safety and efficacy of the...

Abortion, Legal Restrictions,United States,In the Courts
The Center and Movement Partners Urge Court to Block Unprecedented Ruling Rejecting FDA’s Approval of Abortion Drug

Health, Pharmaceutical and Legal Experts Urge Circuit Court to Reverse Order Attempting to Block FDA’s Approval of Abortion Drug

Case to be argued at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on May 17.

Abortion, Legal Restrictions,United States,In the Courts
Health, Pharmaceutical and Legal Experts Urge Circuit Court to Reverse Order Attempting to Block FDA’s Approval of Abortion Drug

Sign up for email updates.

The most up-to-date news on reproductive rights, delivered straight to you.

Footer Menu

  • Careers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Gift Acceptance Policy
  • Contact Us

Center for Reproductive Rights
© (1992-2024)

Use of this site signifies agreement with our disclaimer and privacy policy.

Better Business Bureau Charity Watch Top Rated Center for Reproductive Rights
This site uses necessary, analytics and social media cookies to improve your experience and deliver targeted advertising. Click "Options" or click here to learn more and customize your cookie settings, otherwise please click "Accept" to proceed.
OPTIONSACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
CookieDurationDescription
_ga2 yearsThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_gat_UA-6619340-11 minuteNo description
_gid1 dayThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the wbsite is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages viisted in an anonymous form.
_parsely_session30 minutesThis cookie is used to track the behavior of a user within the current session.
HotJar: _hjAbsoluteSessionInProgress30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjFirstSeen30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjid1 yearThis cookie is set by Hotjar. This cookie is set when the customer first lands on a page with the Hotjar script. It is used to persist the random user ID, unique to that site on the browser. This ensures that behavior in subsequent visits to the same site will be attributed to the same user ID.
HotJar: _hjIncludedInPageviewSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjIncludedInSessionSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjTLDTestsessionNo description
SSCVER1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for online advertising by creating user profile based on their preferences.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
CookieDurationDescription
_fbp3 monthsThis cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisement when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
fr3 monthsThe cookie is set by Facebook to show relevant advertisments to the users and measure and improve the advertisements. The cookie also tracks the behavior of the user across the web on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin.
IDE1 year 24 daysUsed by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
IMRID1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for storing the start and end of the user session for nielsen statistics. It helps in consumer profiling for online advertising.
personalization_id2 yearsThis cookie is set by twitter.com. It is used integrate the sharing features of this social media. It also stores information about how the user uses the website for tracking and targeting.
TDID1 yearThe cookie is set by CloudFare service to store a unique ID to identify a returning users device which then is used for targeted advertising.
test_cookie15 minutesThis cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
CookieDurationDescription
adEdition1 dayNo description
akaas_MSNBC10 daysNo description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional1 yearThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others1 yearNo description
geoEdition1 dayNo description
next-i18next1 yearNo description
SAVE & ACCEPT
Powered by CookieYes Logo
Scroll Up