Democratic candidate David Crowley committed to advocate for a constitutional amendment that would allow voters to decide whether access to abortion and reproductive healthcare is a right protected by the state constitution. 

At an event in Milwaukee on Tuesday, Crowley said that it is good that the state Supreme Court ruled that an 1849 law that was interpreted as a nearly absolute ban on abortion is unenforceable. But, he said, “other restrictions remain, and future legislatures can change that law.” He appeared at the event with U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin and his running mate, lieutenant governor candidate Sarah Godlewski. 

For a proposed constitutional amendment to go before voters, the Wisconsin Legislature has to pass the proposal in two consecutive sessions. The governor does not have a role in signing off on the proposals. 

“Right now, women’s rights are only safe as the next election, and I don’t think Wisconsin’s women should have to hold their breath every four years,” Crowley said. “This amendment will establish a fundamental right to make and carry out decisions about reproductive health, including contraception, fertility treatment, pregnancy, miscarriage care and abortion. It will keep medical judgments about viability and necessary care with treating healthcare professionals, and it will prevent the state from penalizing anyone who is seeking healthcare or helping another person seek the care that they need.”

During the Milwaukee event, Crowley criticized Republican candidate Tom Tiffany as being “an anti-abortion extremist who backed their plan to ban abortion nationwide at zero weeks with no exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of a mother.”

Tiffany previously supported legislation to restrict abortion access during his time in the state Legislature and in Congress. He voted in 2015, when he was a state senator, for the state’s ban on abortion after 20 weeks. In Congress, he has cosponsored legislation that would have made it a crime for doctors to perform abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy.

Tiffany said during a campaign event on Tuesday that he would uphold the state’s current 20-week ban. 

“David Crowley wants unlimited abortion all the way up to nine months, and I just don’t think that’s where most Wisconsinites are,” Tiffany said.

A recent lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin seeks to repeal several laws in Wisconsin that restrict abortion, arguing that they are unconstitutional because of a constitutional right to abortion. There is no language in the state constitution that directly addresses abortion, but the lawsuit argues the passage that guarantees that “all people are born equally free and independent and possess inherent rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” covers a right to abortion.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin filed a new lawsuit challenging Wisconsin abortion restrictions Thursday, just days after the Wisconsin Supreme Court returned to work with a newly cemented 5-2 liberal majority in place.

The lawsuit, filed in Dane County against Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne, argues that two Wisconsin laws violate the state constitution’s guarantee of personal liberty.

One of those laws requires people seeking abortions to wait 24 hours between requesting an abortion and receiving one. The other states that only licensed physicians may provide abortions; this limits a person’s ability to self-administer abortion drugs through telehealth.

“This case asks our court to recognize … that our constitutional freedom includes the ability to make deeply personal decisions about our reproductive health care without unnecessary government interference,” said Tanya Atkinson, the president of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, during a press briefing announcing the lawsuit.

The case names Ozanne as a representative of all Wisconsin district attorneys because they would prosecute violations of the rule that only physicians can administer abortions, said Diane Welsh, a lawyer for Planned Parenthood.

“Anywhere in the state where an abortion would be provided, there could be criminal charges for a person who’s not a physician,” said Welsh.

Lawsuits challenging Wisconsin’s abortion restrictions have been anticipated since Roe vs. Wade — which federally protected abortion access — was overturned in 2022, effectively throwing the issue back to the states. The most significant challenge was over a Civil War-era statute that had been interpreted as banning abortion in Wisconsin and that went back into effect when Roe was overturned.

That law was at the heart of campaigns to elect liberal justices to the state Supreme Court, and last year, the high court overturned the statute, allowing abortions to be administered within the state under certain restrictions.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court found that the 19th-century law had been superseded by a series of additional restrictions passed in the ensuing decades. Immediately, abortion advocates signaled they might challenge those restrictions.

Thursday’s announcement makes good on those possibilities. In the briefing, attorneys for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin argued that requiring a physician to be present during abortions and requiring a person to receive counseling and wait a full day before receiving abortion care are unnecessary and illegal barriers to health care access.

“Through this case, we are asking Wisconsin courts to recognize that these restrictions conflict with the freedoms and protections guaranteed to each of us under our state’s constitution,” said Atkinson. “It’s about whether our constitutional freedoms belong to each of us, or whether the government can make our most personal decisions for us.”

In a statement, a spokesperson for Wisconsin Right to Life said Planned Parenthood is seeking a “permanent constitutional shield” for abortion access.

“This lawsuit isn’t about access,” said Samantha Craig. “It’s about removing the last few guardrails standing between a woman and the procedure table. It is incredible to us that such basic protections for informed consent and women’s safety are disregarded for the sake of protecting Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model.”

The Wisconsin Supreme Court, which would have the final say in the case, has a definitive liberal slant that is all but guaranteed to be in place for years to come. Liberal Justice Chris Taylor, whose 10-year term began in August, was once a lobbyist for Planned Parenthood. Liberal Justice Susan Crawford, who was sworn in a year earlier, once represented the group as a private attorney.

This story was originally published by WPR.

As Wisconsin Supreme Court starts new term, Planned Parenthood challenges abortion restrictions is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.