Federal judge rules Oregon reproductive health law cannot compel anti-abortion group; state leaders to appeal

This article was written by Sabinna Pierre and Alma McCarty (KGW)

OREGON, USA — Oregon officials said Tuesday they will appeal a federal court ruling that limits how the state’s Reproductive Health Equity Act can be applied, while emphasizing that current health coverage remains unchanged.

Attorney General Dan Rayfield said the state will defend the law after a judge determined it cannot be applied to Oregon Right to Life, citing the group's First Amendment religious freedom rights.

"Access to reproductive health care — including abortion and contraception — is fundamental," Rayfield said in a statement released Tuesday. He added that Oregon has sought to ensure such care is available without barriers or out-of-pocket costs through insurance coverage.

Rayfield said the state believes the ruling is narrow in scope and applies only to a specific religious exemption claim. He noted that more details will be available once the court issues a written opinion.

"Our office will use every tool available to the state to defend access to abortion and Oregon's Reproductive Health Equity Act, including appealing this decision," Rayfield said.

Gov. Tina Kotek also criticized the ruling and said her administration is reviewing its implications. In a statement released Tuesday, Kotek described the law as central to the state's approach to health care access.

"The Reproductive Health Equity Act is a cornerstone of Oregon's commitment to ensuring every Oregonian can access reproductive health care," Kotek said, adding that the law has allowed people with private insurance to obtain care without cost barriers for nearly a decade.

Kotek said the state will continue working with the Oregon Department of Justice to evaluate next steps and pursue legal options as the case proceeds.

The governor also said opponents relied on a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Catholic Charities Bureau Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission. She said the state will further assess the ruling once a written opinion is issued.

State officials said the court's decision does not immediately affect health coverage, and the law remains in effect. The judge has not issued an injunction blocking enforcement and has requested additional briefings on a potential final order and how broadly the ruling should apply.

The case centers on whether the law can be applied to Oregon Right to Life. The judge ruled it cannot, based on constitutional protections for religious freedom.

In a press release, Oregon Right to Life called the decision a "victory," but medical experts and health care providers expressed concern about the ruling's potential impact on patients.

Maria Isabel Rodriguez, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the Center for Women's Health at Oregon Health & Science University, called the ruling a setback to what she described as landmark legislation.

"I'm immediately thinking of the people who are going to be most impacted," Rodriguez said, adding that abortion is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the United States. She said roughly one in four American women will have an abortion in their lifetime.

Rodriguez said the 2017 law was particularly important for patients with privately held, high-deductible health plans who face unexpected pregnancy complications. She said hospital-based abortion procedures can cost thousands of dollars, an expense most Oregonians cannot cover out of pocket.

"When we take away the insurance coverage for it, we make it not accessible to so many women," Rodriguez said. "It's not enough to have clinics and hospitals in Oregon where there's people like myself willing and able to provide safe abortion care."

Rodriguez said the law established parity between Medicaid recipients and those with private insurance, ensuring both groups had coverage for reproductive health services. She described abortion as a basic essential health care service and said the financial barriers created by reduced coverage would be particularly cruel for patients already navigating difficult circumstances.

Rodriguez said she and her colleagues at OHSU plan to continue providing care while waiting to see the full scope of the written ruling.

"We don't want to get too far ahead of ourselves," she said. "We want to see what this written statement is so that we know how it's going to impact people."

The Oregon Nurses Association, in a news release, said it "strongly condemns" the ruling, saying, in part: 

"While the immediate impact of this ruling is not yet clear and the law remains in effect for now, this decision sets a dangerous precedent that cannot go unchallenged. Oregon has long been a leader in protecting reproductive freedom and advancing health equity, and ONA members have been on the frontlines of that work. We are proud of that legacy and we refuse to go backward."

Further details about the scope and impact of the ruling are expected after the court releases its written opinion.