Wyoming Judge Blocks Law Targeting Abortion Providers as Legal Battles Intensify
Christine Lichtenfels of Chelsea’s Fund discusses the latest ruling, the ongoing constitutional fight, and looming threats to abortion access in Wyoming.
A Wyoming judge has ruled that a section of a new state law interferes with constitutional rights, delivering a win to abortion rights advocates in one of the country’s most restrictive states.
The challenged law, known as HB 164, was initially crafted to shield off-label prescriptions, such as ivermectin, from disciplinary action. Lawmakers, however, inserted specific carveouts to ensure that the protections would not apply to abortion care or transgender health services. Advocates argued that this targeting was both deliberate and unconstitutional.
Christine Lichtenfels, executive director of Chelsea’s Fund, said the case hinged on the state's attempt to sidestep protections provided by Wyoming’s constitution. The court found that the law infringed on the right to make personal healthcare decisions—a right that remains protected under the state’s healthcare amendment until the Wyoming Supreme Court issues a final ruling.
This preliminary injunction is the latest in a series of legal challenges to abortion restrictions passed by the state legislature. Two other laws, which imposed new regulations on surgical abortion facilities and established ultrasound and waiting period requirements for medication abortion, were also temporarily blocked earlier this year.
The fight largely centers on Wyoming’s constitutional health care amendment, passed in 2012 during the national debate over the Affordable Care Act. Initially focused on resisting federal health care mandates, the amendment broadly affirms the right of individuals to make their own health care decisions, a clause abortion advocates now argue also protects abortion access.
“It was set in that time period,” Lichtenfels said. “But it's quite clear when you look through the history of it, and that if there were pressures, people were aware that this had had broader implications, and they were fine with it.”
While abortion services in Wyoming remain legal, providers continue to operate under constant threat. The state’s medical boards have previously taken aggressive steps against abortion providers, including time-consuming investigations that can lead to professional sanctions and jeopardize providers’ ability to practice.
As the legal battle plays out, abortion remains available in Wyoming through clinics like Wellspring, which offers both medication and procedural abortions, as well as telehealth services and in-clinic options in other parts of the state. Still, the future remains uncertain.
If the Wyoming Supreme Court ultimately affirms abortion rights under the state’s constitution, Lichtenfels anticipates that anti-abortion lawmakers—particularly those aligned with the Freedom Caucus—may attempt to push a constitutional amendment banning abortion. Such an amendment would require two-thirds approval in both chambers before being placed on a statewide ballot. Alternately, if the court rules against the pro-choice side, an amendment protecting abortion rights would be unlikely to meet that threshold given the makeup of the current legislature.
"That's why we aren't acting proactively to get a constitutional amendment through,” Lichtenfels said. “But we are definitely very alert to the fact that they might try to do something like that if the Supreme Court rules in our favor."
For now, abortion advocates remain focused on defending the current constitutional protections and preparing for possible legislative maneuvers in the coming years.