Case Summary
**Case Summary: Preterm-Cleveland v. Lance Himes (Docket No. 14527851)**
**Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
**Date:** [Insert Date of Ruling]
**Overview:**
Preterm-Cleveland v. Lance Himes is a significant case concerning reproductive rights, specifically focusing on the legality and constitutionality of certain abortion regulations imposed by the state of Ohio. The plaintiffs, Preterm-Cleveland, a non-profit organization that provides reproductive health services, challenged the state's regulations that they argued unconstitutionally restricted access to abortion services. Lance Himes, in his capacity as a representative of the Ohio Department of Health, was the defendant in this case.
**Facts:**
- Preterm-Cleveland operates as a comprehensive reproductive health provider in Ohio, offering services that include abortion care.
- The Ohio Department of Health, under the direction of Lance Himes, implemented various regulations intended to limit abortion access, including mandatory waiting periods, counseling requirements, and restrictions on the use of specific medical procedures.
- Preterm-Cleveland argued these regulations imposed an undue burden on individuals seeking abortions, violating their constitutional rights as protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
**Legal Issues:**
1. Whether the abortion regulations imposed by the state of Ohio constitute an undue burden on the right to access abortion services as established by Supreme Court precedents.
2. The extent of the state’s interest in regulating abortion and how it balances against individual rights.
**Ruling:**
The court ultimately ruled in favor of Preterm-Cleveland, finding that the regulations imposed by Lance Himes did indeed create substantial obstacles for those seeking access to abortion care without serving a valid state interest. The ruling emphasized the constitutional protections afforded to individuals under the Fourteenth Amendment and highlighted the importance of maintaining access to reproductive health services.
**Impact:**
This ruling has implications for reproductive rights in Ohio, potentially paving the way for challenges to similar regulations across the state and influencing broader discussions about access to abortion services nationally. The case reinforces the legal principle that while states may regulate medical procedures, such regulations must not infringe upon constitutionally protected rights.
**Conclusion:**
Preterm-Cleveland v. Lance Himes serves as a critical case in the ongoing dialogue about reproductive rights and state regulation. The court’s decision underscores the importance of balancing state interests with individual rights in the context of abortion access, affirming the necessity of upholding constitutional protections for all individuals seeking reproductive health services.
[Note: Specific dates or additional case details would need to be filled in as appropriate based on the actual case record.]