Wrigley v. Romanick
North Dakota Supreme Court
988 N.W.2d 231 (2023)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
In 2007, the North Dakota legislature enacted a statute making it a criminal felony to provide an abortion under all circumstances, including if the abortion was necessary to save the pregnant woman’s life or health. That statute provided that a healthcare provider who was charged with a felony could present an affirmative defense that the abortion had been necessary to preserve the woman’s life or health. This affirmative defense could be raised only after the provider had been charged, and the provider was required to convince a jury of the necessity using a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. Finally, the statute provided that it would become effective once the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion authorizing states to regulate abortion. In 2022, the Supreme Court issued an opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization authorizing states to regulate abortion, and North Dakota considered the statute effective. A group of medical providers and others (plaintiffs) sued to prevent the statute’s enforcement, arguing that the North Dakota Constitution gave pregnant women a fundamental right to an abortion and that the statute violated this fundamental right. The trial court granted a preliminary injunction enjoining the state from enforcing the statute. The North Dakota Supreme Court agreed to review the matter.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jensen, C.J.)
Concurrence (Tufte, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 913,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,300 briefs, keyed to 999 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.


