A Wyoming judge struck down three abortion laws on Friday, the latest instance of the courts here rejecting attempts by state lawmakers to curtail the procedure in the Equality State.

Retired District Judge Thomas T. C. Campbell ruled the laws violated a 2012 amendment to the Wyoming Constitution that protects individuals’ rights to make their own healthcare decisions. The Wyoming Supreme Court in January cited the same provision when it struck down two statewide abortion bans, and a different judge noted the amendment in April when he blocked enforcement of the state’s new “heartbeat” bill. 

Friday’s ruling concerned three laws passed by lawmakers in 2025. One created a mandatory ultrasound requirement and a 48-hour waiting period for patients seeking abortions. The second enacted a set of new and more stringent regulations that critics said were intended to make operating an abortion clinic in Wyoming unfeasible. A third involved abortion restrictions within a larger law governing the prescription of off-label medications.

Campbell temporarily blocked enforcement of all three laws last year after the plaintiffs in the case — which included abortion providers and abortion rights advocates — filed suit in state court. But his final determination that the laws are unconstitutional did not come until Friday.

‘No competent evidence’

In his 34-page decision, Campbell wrote repeatedly that the state, which had defended the laws in court, failed to provide evidence backing its claims. He noted the state alleged that the ultrasound law serves as a way to protect women from the consequences of undiagnosed ectopic pregnancies. But the judge found that the state “offers no competent evidence that such instances are occurring with any measure of regularity.” Additionally, he wrote, the state “offered no cogent evidence illustrating that a waiting period is necessary for any purpose.” 

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs showed that the ultrasound rule would not significantly lessen the risk for ectopic pregnancy complications and that waiting periods have no medical utility, the judge wrote. They also offered “ample evidence” that the ultrasound requirement lacked a compelling government interest, according to Campbell’s ruling.

“The Plaintiffs provide concise evidence undermining the medical necessity of an ultrasound prior to undergoing a chemical abortion,” he wrote. “The Plaintiffs request for relief is underscored by their evidence that abortion is inherently safe. They provide Wyoming Department of Health data indicating zero complications or deaths resulting from abortion in Wyoming. They also specifically cite clinical guidance explicitly proclaiming that ultrasounds are not medically necessary for women seeking chemical abortions.”

Campbell also took issue with what he termed a lack of evidence by state lawyers defending the law that required abortion clinics be regulated as “ambulatory surgical centers,” which come with more stringent, and costly, regulations. The state contended the law constituted a compelling interest because it closed a legal loophole, but did not provide evidence showing that “consistency of laws forms a compelling government interest,” he wrote. 

He also rejected the state’s arguments that the law helped to ensure women’s health.

“Of course, it is conceivable that preserving women’s health could independently invoke a compelling interest,” he wrote. “However, outside of sweeping generalizations, the State again provides no evidence or a causal link of how a surgical abortion facility, operating outside the regulatory framework of an [ambulatory surgical center], negatively impacts women’s health and welfare.”

As for the off-label medication law, which abortion advocates fear would discourage doctors from prescribing common abortion medications, the judge agreed with the plaintiffs, who maintained it was a solution in need of a problem.

Abortion opponents stymied by constitutional amendment

State lawmakers have made several attempts to limit or ban abortion in Wyoming since 2022, when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the landmark ruling Roe v. Wade. Since then, the same group of plaintiffs has repeatedly succeeded in convincing the courts that the laws violated a 2012 amendment to the Wyoming Constitution. Voters enacted the amendment after a push by conservatives who feared Obamacare would lead to government infringement on healthcare autonomy. 

The amendment protects adults’ rights to make their own healthcare decisions. The Wyoming Supreme Court in January concluded that “a woman has a fundamental right to make her own health care decisions, including the decision to have an abortion.”

In the aftermath of that ruling, Gov. Mark Gordon called on the Wyoming Legislature to pursue a constitutional amendment that would settle the matter. But lawmakers instead chose to pass a law that made abortion illegal once fetal cardiac activity is detected, which can occur by the sixth week. That law is also tied up in the courts while a legal challenge proceeds.

Still, anti-abortion advocates in the Legislature promised to continue their attempts to end the practice here. 

“We will not quit, we will not give up and we will not stop the fight to protect innocent life,” Speaker of the House Chip Neiman said in a video posted to the Wyoming Freedom Caucus’ Facebook page. “It’s really too bad. It’s quite a testimony, quite a statement about our judiciary that, I think once again, they’ve acted to thwart and to ignore the will of the Legislature and have complete disregard for innocent life in Wyoming.”

Neiman, a Republican who is now running for the state senate, said he expected Wyoming Attorney General Keith Kautz, who advocated against abortion after he retired from the Wyoming Supreme Court, to fight Friday’s ruling, presumably by appealing to the high court.

Meanwhile, the president of Wyoming’s only abortion clinic, Casper’s Wellspring Health Access, hailed Friday’s decision, while also alluding to the likelihood of more legal battles ahead. 

“These politically motivated laws, which unfairly target abortion providers, harm the people we serve by creating unnecessary barriers to essential health care,” Julie Burkhart said in a statement. While we know the fight against these laws is far from over, this outcome strengthens our determination to continue providing comprehensive reproductive health care, including abortion, to the people of Wyoming.”

The University of Wyoming has conducted repeated polls on abortion in Wyoming. The latest, which was released in November 2024, showed that about 10% of Wyomingites backed a total ban on abortion, with another 31% favoring abortion restrictions with exceptions for rape, incest or when a woman’s life is in danger. Another 20% preferred those exemptions and others once the need for an abortion had been clearly established. About 39% said abortion should remain a personal choice.