Planned Parenthood is suing Wisconsin to let non-doctors perform abortions.
The judge who might decide the case used to work for Planned Parenthood herself.
Now that same court could decide whether unborn babies in Wisconsin have any legal protection left.
Planned Parenthood's Lawsuit Targets Two of Wisconsin's Abortion Restrictions
Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin filed suit against the state in Dane County Circuit Court, in a case captioned Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin v. Ozanne.
The lawsuit targets two specific laws.
One requires that only a licensed physician can perform an abortion.
The other requires a woman to wait 24 hours after her first appointment before she can have the abortion.
Planned Parenthood is not claiming Wisconsin's Constitution already spells out a right to abortion.
It never has.
Instead, the group wants judges to read one in.
Its argument leans on language guaranteeing that all people are "born equally free and independent" with rights including "life" and "liberty."
Tanya Atkinson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Wisconsin, called it a "promise" the courts should finally recognize.
"Our constitutional freedom includes the ability to make deeply personal decisions about our reproductive healthcare without unnecessary government interference," Atkinson said.
Democrats in the legislature are running the same play from the other direction.
Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer has promoted a bill that would strip the physician requirement, the waiting period, an ultrasound requirement, and healthcare coverage restrictions all at once.
Wisconsin Is Running the Same Playbook Kansas Used to Manufacture a Right
This exact legal strategy already worked once.
In 2019, the Kansas Supreme Court found an abortion right hiding inside the state constitution's promise of "natural rights," including life and liberty.
Wisconsin's lawsuit leans on nearly identical language.
If it works, no legislature vote will be required to rewrite Wisconsin's abortion laws from the bench.
One Wisconsin Supreme Court justice already has a head start on that argument.
Justice Chris Taylor served as legal and policy director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin from 2003 to 2011.
She spent those years shaping the group's constitutional and reproductive health strategy directly.
She later served in the state Assembly, then became a circuit court judge, then a court of appeals judge, before Wisconsin voters elected her to the state's highest court in 2026.
Nothing requires her to step aside from a case built on arguments she helped originate.
Eleven Lawmakers Say This Lawsuit Opens the Door to Predators
State Rep. Lindee Brill and ten other Republican lawmakers condemned the lawsuit directly.
Doctors are mandatory reporters of suspected abuse under Wisconsin law.
Brill's coalition argues that removing physicians from the abortion room removes that safeguard for any girl or woman being abused.
"Removing physicians from the abortion equation strips basic protection for a girl or woman aborting her baby," the lawmakers said.
They warned the lawsuit would open the door to sexual abuse of minors and sex trafficking going undetected.
The lawmakers also pointed to what they call Planned Parenthood's record of ignoring state reporting laws around rape and abuse.
This is not hypothetical.
A Colorado lawsuit documented how a man impregnated his 13-year-old stepdaughter and brought her to a Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood for an abortion.
None of the four staff members who saw her asked how she got pregnant or checked her relationship to the man in the room.
One employee said in a deposition that "being 13 and pregnant alone is not a red flag."
The abuse continued for months until the girl finally told her mother.
Wisconsin Right to Life Says This Is About the Business Model, Not Privacy
Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said the "between a woman and her doctor" line was never true to begin with.
"This lawsuit shows that was never true," Weininger said.
"It's asking judges to hand it a permanent constitutional shield for its abortion-first business model," she said.
Weininger said informed consent and a waiting period are basic standards of good medical care, not obstacles.
"This is about removing the last few guardrails standing between a woman and the procedure table," she said.
A recent study of more than 865,000 insurance claims found that 11 percent of women who took the abortion pill suffered a serious adverse event.
Wisconsin's waiting period exists precisely so a woman has time to hear numbers like that before she is on the table.
Weininger closed with a challenge to the lawsuit's entire premise.
"You cannot invoke our state Constitution's right to life to defend an industry built on ending lives," she said.
Wisconsin Right to Life has vowed to fight the case in court.
The eleven lawmakers have vowed to fight it in the legislature.
Neither vote counts on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, where Chris Taylor already does.
The case starts in Dane County, but everyone involved is already building for the appeal that lands back on her bench.
Sources:
- Dave Andrusko, "Planned Parenthood Wants a Right to Kill Babies in Abortions," LifeNews.com, September 11, 2026.
- Baylor Spears, "Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin files constitutional challenge to state abortion restrictions," News From The States, September 2026.
- "Representative Brill, 10 Other Republicans Condemn Planned Parenthood Lawsuit," WHBL, September 11, 2026.
- Wisconsin Court System, Justice Chris Taylor biography, wicourts.gov.
- Hodes & Nauser, M.D.s, P.A. v. Schmidt, 309 Kan. 610 (2019), Kansas Supreme Court.
- "The Abortion Pill Harms Women: Insurance Data Reveals One in Ten Patients Experiences a Serious Adverse Event," Ethics and Public Policy Center.
- "Planned Parenthood's repeated failure to report child sexual abuse has impacted countless lives," Live Action.
