DENVER– A judge has temporarily suspended Colorado’s ban on what experts believe are unproven medical abortion treatments at a religious clinic that alleged in a lawsuit that a recently signed law violated her constitutional rights.

Judge Daniel Domenico, who noted that Colorado is the only state to ban the treatment, issued a temporary restraining order over the weekend after Bella Health and Wellness said barring them from prescribing the so-called “abortion pill withdrawal” treatment violated their First Amendment. the right to freedom of speech and religion.

The idea of ​​abolishing medical abortion became a flashpoint in the clash over reproductive rights across the country after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, leaving abortion up to the states. About a dozen states passed laws in previous years requiring abortion providers to inform their patients about “reverse” treatments.

A Republican proposal to do so in Colorado this year ran into a Democratic-controlled statehouse. This is partly because the treatment has drawn widespread condemnation from the medical community, with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists stating that it is “not based on science and (not) up to clinical standards.”

The new ban extends until at least October the deadline for Colorado’s medical boards to determine whether the treatment is “generally accepted standard of practice” and therefore allowed.

The ban was part of a package of three bills to secure abortion rights and transgender care in the state.

The specific bill that included the ban also targeted the so-called deceptive practice of anti-abortion centers, which are known to pose as abortion clinics but do not actually offer the procedure. Instead, they are trying to convince patients not to terminate the pregnancy.

The temporary restraining order, first reported by The Colorado Sun, covers the entire bill.

In Colorado, Bella Health and Wellness argued that banning them from treatment would “violate their genuinely religious beliefs” and that they had a patient whose current treatment would be interrupted if the new law went into effect.

One of the organization’s lawyers, Laura Volk Slavis of the Becket Foundation for Religious Freedom, wrote in a statement: “Colorado’s new law is the opposite of choice – it targets women who change their minds and forces them to get the abortions they want to stop. . This law violates the constitutional rights of these women and their doctors.”

Domenico, a district judge appointed by former President Donald Trump, wrote in his ruling: “I believe that Plaintiffs are reasonably likely to succeed on the merits of one or more of their claims that short-term relief is warranted until defendants are heard in opposition.” “.

Domenico added that the restraining order only applies to Bella Health and Wellness. The organization did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Medical abortion is performed by taking two drugs—mifepristone and then misoprostol—for several days. Bella Health and Wellness provides patients with a drug called progesterone that they claim reverses the effects of mifepristone.

The lawsuit comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone.

Representative of the Governor of Colorado. Jared Polis and another Democratic candidate in the Colorado Senate declined to comment, citing a pending lawsuit.

In the Colorado case, a hearing on a preliminary injunction — effectively an extension of the 14-day temporary restraining order — is set for April 24.

____

Bedine is a member of the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on hidden issues.

WASHINGTON — Key Senate Republicans on Monday opposed the interim replacement of Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., on the Judiciary Committee, leaving Democrats in a quandary as several of President Joe Biden’s nominees are stuck on the panel in court.

Sen. John Cornyn, D-Tex., a senior committee member close to party leaders, said he and his colleagues oppose the idea because it would help Democrats promote judges along party lines.

“These are, by definition, the most controversial candidates,” Cornyn told NBC News, “and if the Democrats are strictly dependent on the votes of their own party line to get them out of the committee — I don’t think there is any appetite on our side. to help those we consider controversial or unqualified candidates get validated.”

Asked if there was a way to win the 10 Senate Republicans needed to break the filibuster and make the trade, he said, “I don’t think so.”

Feinstein, 89, was absent from the Senate for weeks after learning she was hospitalized with shingles. Amid calls to resign, Feinstein issued a statement asking to be replaced by another Democrat so the commission could promote judges until she could return.

Senator Tom Tillis, RN.C., also spoke out against Feinstein’s plan on Monday.

“I will vote against any attempt by Senate Democrats to temporarily replace Senator Feinstein on the Judiciary Committee. I have deep respect for Senator Feinstein, but this is an unprecedented request solely to appease those who insist on radical, activist judges,” Tillis, who also sits on the committee, wrote on Twitter.

Centrist Senator Susan Collins of Maine said she, too, opposed the swap. “She was an outstanding senator, she is my friend. For the past two years there has been a concerted campaign to force her out of the Judicial Committee. And I think it’s wrong and I won’t be a part of it,” Collins said.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, on Monday urged Republicans to show “a little kindness and concern” to Feinstein and green-light the committee’s interim replacement, noting a similar situation could happen to them in the future.

“She is obviously sensitive to the fact that her absence is affecting the committee,” Durbin told reporters. “I’m not going to push her to any other decision. I think we can fix this problem, do it very quickly, and I hope we can find 10 Republicans to join us in this effort.”

Cornyn, Collins and Tillis are among the Senate Republicans who have been more cooperative with Democrats in recent years. Their abandonment of the idea is a bad sign for Democrats, who will need to defeat at least 10 Republicans in Feinstein’s absence to secure her replacement on the Judiciary Committee.

The richest group of seven countries have set higher targets for renewable energy production by 2030 amid the energy crisis triggered by Russia’s war on Ukraine, but they have not set a deadline for phasing out coal-fired power plants.

At a meeting hosted by Japan, ministers from Japan, the US, Canada, Italy, France, Germany and the UK reaffirmed their commitment to achieving zero carbon emissions by mid-century and stated that they intend to collectively increase solar power capacity by 1 terawatt and offshore wind 150 gigawatts by the end of this decade.

“The G7 is helping to expand the use of renewable energy worldwide and reduce costs through strengthening capacity, including through the collective increase in offshore wind farms… and the collective increase in solar energy…,” said the Ministers of Energy and the Environment at the 36th page statement. communiqué issued after two days meeting.

“In the midst of an unprecedented energy crisis, it is important to simultaneously take action to combat climate change and ensure energy security,” Japanese Industry Minister Yasutoshi Nishimura said at a press conference. Reuters.

The ministerial statement also condemned Russia’s “illegal, unjustified and unprovoked” invasion of Ukraine and its “devastating” environmental impact. Ministers voted in support of green recovery and reconstruction in Ukraine.

They also published a five-point plan to ensure access to critical raw materials that will be critical to the transition to a green economy.

Before the meeting, Japan faced criticism from green groups for its desire to keep the door open for further investment in natural gas, a fossil fuel. The final agreed text states that such investments “may be suitable” for dealing with the crisis if they are in line with climate goals.

The ministerial meeting in the northern city of Sapporo takes place just over a month before the G7 leaders’ summit in Hiroshima.