Abortion-right protesters

A state appellate court ruling found that regulations governing abortion clinics and the way Ohio enacted them are unconstitutional. The ruling, which will allow the last abortion clinic in Toledo to remain open, cited a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling involving Texas regulations as part of its analysis.

(cleveland.com file)

TOLEDO, Ohio - A state appellate court on Friday agreed with a Lucas County judge that regulations governing an abortion clinic, and the way Ohio enacted them, are unconstitutional.

The 3-0 ruling in favor of the Capital Care Network means that the last open abortion clinic in Toledo can remain open.

You can read the court's ruling below. Mobile users click here.

A spokesman for the Ohio attorney general's office said no decision has been made yet on whether to appeal the decision to the Ohio Supreme Court.

The leader of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio, an advocate for abortion rights, cheered the ruling.

The case

Capital Care sued Ohio in 2014 after the state rejected a written transfer agreement it had negotiated with the University of Michigan Health System about 50 miles away. Capital Care was unable to get an agreement through a Toledo hospital.

The Ohio Department of Health rejected the transfer agreement, saying it did not meet the state's requirement because the hospital was not within 30 miles of the clinic, a provision in the state budget approved in 2013.

Capital Care argued that the regulation was an undue burden on a woman's right to abortion access, that it unconstitutionally delegated state authority to outside parties and that its enactment in the state budget violated the Ohio Constitution.

Lucas County Judge Myron Duhart ruled against the state in June 2015. The state appealed that ruling.

Friday's appellate decision

The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals found that the state law requiring abortion clinics to have a written transfer agreement with local hospitals created an undue burden on a woman's right to have access to an abortion.

That burden, the court said, clearly outweighs the "virtually non-existent health benefits" created by the regulations. As part of its analysis, the court applied the standards set in a June U.S. Supreme Court ruling, which overturned some Texas regulations on a clinic.

The requirement for the transfer agreement also represents an unconstitutional delegation of authority by the state, the court held, because whether a clinic can comply with the state's regulation hinges on the decisions of an outside party.

Lastly, the court found the enactment of the regulations for the written transfer agreement unconstitutional because they violated the Ohio Constitution's requirement that legislation be confined to a single subject. The regulations were included in the state budget enacted in 2013.

The court recognized that a budget bill, because it appropriates money, could touch on a broad range of state entities. But the licensing requirements for clinics in the budget bill are not connected to the appropriation of money and therefore are in violation of the single-subject rule.

The reaction

Dan Tierney, a spokesman for Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine, said the attorney general's office will review the ruling with the Ohio Department of Health and then decide whether to appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court.

Kellie Copeland, executive director for NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio, predicted the state would lose if it appeals.

"The U.S. Supreme Court said if an abortion restriction is burdensome and does not improve care, then it is unconstitutional. Ohio's transfer agreement requirements for abortion providers are burdensome and medically unnecessary," Copeland said. "Today's ruling is a common-sense decision, and protects the health of women across Northwest Ohio."