In Nashville, Tennessee, new female plaintiffs have joined a legal case against the state’s expansive abortion restriction that was enacted after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.

This lawsuit is one of many being filed in predominantly Republican states to clarify the criteria for patients to lawfully obtain an abortion.

Here is the most recent update on the current developments in Tennessee and the status of multiple lawsuits.

Four additional women have joined the ongoing legal battle in Tennessee, which was originally initiated in September. This brings the total number of plaintiffs, including two doctors, to nine in the lawsuit against the state’s abortion ban.

Three women who were added on Monday were unable to receive abortions due to serious complications with their pregnancies. This resulted in them having to travel to another state in order to undergo the procedure.

One of the latest individuals filing a lawsuit is Rebecca Milner. She found out in February 2023 that she was expecting her first child, after undergoing numerous unsuccessful fertility treatments.

Based on legal records, Milner was informed during a 20-week check-up that the amniotic fluid surrounding her unborn child was at a low level. A specialist later confirmed that her water had most likely broken several weeks prior and there was no way to rescue the baby.

Unfortunately, the doctor informed her that due to Tennessee’s abortion ban, she was unable to receive abortion services for her circumstances.

The reason for this is that the ban specifically states that ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages are the only legal exceptions. Although the law does give doctors the authority to use “reasonable medical judgment” in deciding if an abortion is necessary to save the life of a pregnant patient or to prevent severe and permanent damage to a major bodily function, medical professionals have raised concerns about this provision being too vague. This puts doctors at a significant legal risk of violating the law.

According to legal records, Milner ultimately went to Virginia to terminate her pregnancy and came back to Tennessee with a severe fever. Medical professionals informed her that she had developed an infection, which was made worse by the delay in obtaining an abortion.

According to the lawsuit, Tennessee’s ban goes against its supposed goal of promoting life and instead puts pregnant patients in danger of death, injury, and illness, potentially leading to infertility. This could make it harder for families who wish to have children to do so.

The plaintiffs in Tennessee are claiming that the ban infringes on the constitutional right to life for pregnant patients. They are requesting a three-judge panel to define the specific situations in which patients can lawfully obtain an abortion. This includes cases where the patient has received a fatal diagnosis.

On Monday, the plaintiffs, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, modified their complaint to include a request for a temporary injunction during the ongoing court case.

Linda Goldstein, a lawyer from the center, stated that following our September case filing, we received numerous calls from individuals who had gone through similar traumatic experiences. These women were subjected to needless pain and distress, and some even came close to losing their lives. It is evident that the medical exemptions for abortion bans in Tennessee, as well as other states, are ineffective.

The representative for the Attorney General’s office in Tennessee, responsible for defending the state’s ban on abortion, did not promptly reply to an email asking for a statement.

The Center for Reproductive Rights is currently involved in legal disputes in Idaho, Oklahoma, and Texas in an effort to obtain greater clarification regarding exceptions for abortion bans.

A judge in Idaho has rejected a plea from the state’s leading legal officer to dismiss a lawsuit aimed at clarifying the exceptions included in the state’s comprehensive abortion ban.

However, Judge Jason Scott of the 4th District limited the scope of the case to specifically address the conditions under which abortion is permissible and whether emergency abortion services are protected under Idaho’s state constitutional rights to life and safety.

In the state of Texas, a judge initially declared that the ban on abortions was too limiting for pregnant women with complications. However, this decision was quickly halted after the state appealed. The Texas Supreme Court will now make a final decision, but this process could take several months.