Trending
The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed Trumbull County Domestic Relations/Juvenile Division Judge David L. Engler's lawsuit seeking to stop abortions in the state.
The court ruled 7-0 Wednesday in favor of the state, which filed to dismiss the case. The court dismissed the case without explanation.
Engler, a pro-life Republican, said Wednesday: "I'm disappointed, but it's not the end. A 15-year-old needs permission to get a tattoo, but not an abortion.There's a constitutional right to be a parent and it needs to be enforced."
In a May 11 motion, Julie Pfeiffer, an assistant attorney general, wrote Engler's April 14 lawsuit should be dismissed as he "lacks standing because he has not alleged an injury that is fairly traceable to the conduct of any of the respondents."
Pfeiffer also sought dismissal of the case, stating the court lacks "jurisdiction over claims for declaratory and injunctive relief" which Engler sought, Engler doesn't have any clear legal right to judicial-bypass hearings -- and if he does, the constitutional amendment "prevails over any conflicting statute," "any claim related to the ballot language for the amendment is untimely," and the required affidavit he filed doesn't comply with the high court's rules of practice.
Engler contended the 2023 constitutional amendment legalizing abortions eliminates guardrails for minors -- specifically removing parental consent as well as effectively removing a state law that gives juvenile court judges, such as himself, the authority to grant abortions to those under 18 years of age if petitioned through a judicial-bypass hearing. Engler argued that people weren't aware that minors could obtain abortions without parental or judicial consent when they voted on it.
In his April 14 writ of mandamus, Engler wrote that during the five years before the law took effect, the Trumbull County Juvenile Court saw about two judicial-bypass petitions annually. Since then, there's been none because of the reproductive rights law. Engler started serving as a judge in 2025.
The lawsuit was filed against then-Attorney General Dave Yost, Secretary of State Frank LaRose -- both Republicans who oppose abortion -- and the Ohio Ballot Board, which approves ballot language for statewide constitutional amendments.The American Civil Liberties Union sought to file a motion to dismiss the case before the Supreme Court's decision.
Engler's lawsuit sought "to stop the enforcement of the abortion amendment until the language can be corrected and voted on again."
Engler said Wednesday: "It's very disappointing that Dave Yost agreed with the American Civil Liberties Union that parents don't have rights to be parents when it comes to whether their child can get an abortion or not."
Yost announced May 7 that he would resign, effective June 7, to join a Christian conservative legal advocacy group that played a central role in the landmark 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson case in the U.S. Supreme Court that determined the U.S. Constitution does not give women the right to abortions. Andy Wilson is serving the remainder of Yost's term.
In his May 20 response to the state's motion to dismiss, Engler wrote: "This court should reject respondents' attempt to escape judicial review of these issues. The motion to dismiss should be denied. Ohio's Constitution, read as a whole, does not sanction the abrupt abolition of juvenile-court jurisdiction over bypass petitions by mere implication. (My) standing and the merits of (my) mandamus claim are clear. This court should allow the case to proceed so it can vindicate the principle that no branch of government may surrender or usurp the judicial power without explicit authority."
Engler wrote he has legal standing because of the loss of the ability to have judicial-bypass hearings.
But after the Ohio Supreme Court's decision, Engler said: "I'll have to look at it and talk to law and parents groups that support my efforts and the notion that parents have the right to be a parent. From the judicial perspective, it might not be me who has standing, but a parent who has standing."
Engler's lawsuit sought a declaration that the reproductive rights law "is unenforceable to the extent it is construed or applied to eliminate or interfere with juvenile court jurisdiction over judicial-bypass proceeding" and that it "must be harmonized with Article IV to preserve such jurisdiction."
Engler wanted the Ohio Supreme Court to order "ballot language that does not mislead voters regarding the effects of a proposed amendment and this court polices ballot language for accuracy and transparency."
Engler wrote in the lawsuit that "voters were not informed that Article I, Section 22 would eliminate judicial-bypass proceedings or strip juvenile courts of jurisdiction, constituting a material omission that renders the amendment unenforceable as applied to the elimination of judicial-bypass proceedings."
The right to an abortion in Ohio took effect in December 2023, a month after a reproductive rights constitutional amendment was approved by 57% of voters.
Engler filed the lawsuit a few weeks before losing the May 3 Republican primary for a seat on the 11th District Court of Appeals.