PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MONTANA and SAMUEL DICKMAN, M.D., on behalf of themselves and their patients, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. STATE OF MONTANA and AUSTIN KNUDSEN, Attorney General of the State of Montana, in his official capacity, and his agents and successors, Defendants and Appellants

PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MONTANA and SAMUEL DICKMAN, M.D., on behalf of themselves and their patients, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. STATE OF MONTANA and AUSTIN KNUDSEN, Attorney General of the State of Montana, in his official capacity, and his agents and successors, Defendants and Appellants. Oral Argument is set for Wednesday, March 6, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. in the courtroom of the Montana Supreme Court, Joseph P. Mazurek Justice Building, Helena, Montana. Live-streamed through the Court’s website at: http://stream.vision.net/MT-JUD/ The 2013 Montana Legislature enacted the Parental Consent for Abortion Act, which bars a minor from obtaining an abortion in Montana without a parent’s or guardian’s consent. Planned Parenthood challenged the Act’s constitutionality before its effective date. The Montana Attorney General agreed to a preliminary injunction and the Act has never gone into effect. In February 2023, the District Court ruled that the Act impermissibly infringes on the right to privacy under the Montana Constitution. The court applied a strict-scrutiny standard in considering whether the Act is constitutional because the court concluded that the Act implicated a fundamental state constitutional right. On appeal, the State of Montana argues that minors are not entitled to the same fundamental rights as adults and thus the court should not have applied the strict-scrutiny standard. The State argues that the Act enhances the protection of minors who would seek abortions by requiring those minors to obtain parental consent. Thus, instead of strictly scrutinizing the Act’s constitutionality, the court should have balanced the rights of minors against the State’s right to limit minors’ fundamental rights by statute. The State argues that under this standard, the Act is constitutional.