Tennessee has initiated a lawsuit following a federal judge’s ruling that effectively makes it illegal to permanently obstruct certain state laws aimed at assisting minors in obtaining out-of-state abortions.

The “Abortion Trafficking of Minors” Act of 2024 establishes a misdemeanor offense for “intentionally recruiting, transporting, or aiding pregnant minors” in their pursuit of an abortion or abortion-related medication. This legislation excludes parents and guardians, as well as those with written consent.

The law was contested in July 2024 by State Assemblyman Aftin, a Democrat from Nashville and social worker advocating for abortion rights, along with Rachel Welty, a Nashville attorney promoting safe and healthy access to abortion.

In July, U.S. Senior Circuit Judge Julia Gibbons ruled to permanently block the adoption aspect of the law. Gibbons stated that the law only criminalizes one viewpoint in the abortion discourse and is therefore a blatant infringement on the First Amendment.

The Tennessee Senate approved the bill, which penalizes support for minors pursuing abortions.

This law does not clarify what “employment” refers to. State lawyers posited it indicates the “targeting of minors for specific purposes—namely, securing an abortion without parental consent.” Conversely, Behn and Welty defined it as “encouraging or persuading, and implying that options are available.”

Regardless, Gibbons determined this component is unconstitutional.

Tennessee’s near-total abortion ban took effect in 2022, prompting those seeking abortions to travel to states where the procedure remains legal.

Judge Gibbons noted that “Tennessee cannot spread information regarding legal actions in another state,” as she presided over the Nashville case after a number of federal judges recused themselves.

The determination concerning the recruitment section of the law now rests with the Sixth Circuit, following an appeal filed by the Tennessee Attorney General in late August.

Attorneys Daniel Holwitz, Melissa Dix, and Sarah Martin, representing the two women behind the lawsuit, also submitted a “cross appeal.”