“What we’re seeing here is lawmakers trying to single out abortion,” said Aileen Gleizer, a spokesperson for the two independent clinics (Blue Mountain Clinic in Missoula and All Families Healthcare in Whitefish). “They haven’t been able to outlaw it, and so they’re trying to come up with kind of fictionalized bureaucratic barriers to make it untenable for clinics to operate.”

Judge Christopher Abbott wrote in his ruling that the case is far from over, but that the state has no compelling interest to require licenses from abortion providers when the state cannot yet issue any. He wrote the court must maintain the status quo while the constitutionality of law is hashed out.

The legal challenge against House Bill 937 is not over: A temporary restraining order blocks the new law from taking effect until further arguments on a lengthier injunction, which would put the brakes on that law over the duration of the case.

Abbott wrote that the providers had established an actual controversy in the suit, that a restraining order was in the public interest, and that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in their argument that the section of the new law “violates the right to individual privacy in the absence of a means of obtaining a license.”

“Abortion care is already subject to government oversight and regulation, and it is incredibly safe and necessary health care. Yet abortion providers like myself have faced relentless attacks for providing care to our communities. This newest attack has nothing to do with patient safety, it is designed to harass us and our patients,” Weems said in the press release.

“To the extent HB 937 requires Plaintiffs to obtain abortion-specific facility licensure, it violates Montanans’ right to access abortion from their chosen health care provider,” the filing read. “As this Court and the Montana Supreme Court have repeatedly concluded, singling out abortion care for unique and additional regulation infringes individuals’ fundamental right to abortion.”