Georgia Supreme Court allows abortion law to stand. What’s next?

At the end of the hearing, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney asked both parties if he would need more time to keep investigating the special grand jury report's results and whether could be released to the public. Miguel Martinez / miguel.martinezjimenez@ajc.com

Credit: Miguel Martinez/AJC

Credit: Miguel Martinez/AJC

At the end of the hearing, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney asked both parties if he would need more time to keep investigating the special grand jury report's results and whether could be released to the public. Miguel Martinez / miguel.martinezjimenez@ajc.com

The Georgia State Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the state’s restrictive abortion law would remain in effect, overturning a lower court decision and sending the case back to a Fulton Superior Court judge.

Last year, Fulton Superior Judge Robert McBurney ruled that Georgia’s 2019 abortion statute, which bans most abortions once a doctor can detect fetal cardiac activity, was passed illegally since Roe v. Wade was the law of the land at the time. In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which allowed abortions up until a fetus could be viable outside the mother’s body.

With the state Supreme Court order disagreeing with the superior court ruling, McBurney will now have to rule on the constitutionality of other arguments made during last year’s hearing. Abortion rights advocates and providers argued that the law violates the state constitution’s right to privacy, which they said grants more expansive privacy rights than the U.S. Constitution. State lawyers contended the law should remain in effect because “abortion always harms a third party,” the embryo or fetus.

Experts for the state also said that having an abortion had a greater negative effect on the mental and physical health of the mother than having an unwanted child. Experts testifying on behalf of abortion rights advocates said carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term has more of a negative effect on a patient’s mental and physical health.

It’s unclear what exactly the next steps will be. McBurney could ask lawyers to file more briefs, come in to make more arguments or rule based on the testimony from last year. There is no deadline for McBurney to rule on the law’s constitutionality.