Tennessee's 48-hour waiting period law that protects the unborn reportedly was declared constitutional in court after a six-year battle.

The National Right To Life (NRTL) said Tennessee finally won the war on legal challenges put against their 48-hour waiting period after the timeline elapsed on Friday, Nov. 12. The NRTL cited Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery who pointed out the timeline to challenge the United States Supreme Court October 2020 decision of District Judge Bernard Friedman ran out.

In a statement Slatery said that "all legal challenges exhausted" since the plaintiffs to the case, which is Bristol Regional Women's Center, have failed to "seek further review" from the United States Supreme Court.

"Tennessee Attorney General Herbert H. Slatery III announced today that the constitutionality of Tennessee's 48-hour waiting period for abortions is no longer subject to question. The opportunity for the plaintiffs to seek further review from the U.S. Supreme Court has passed, so the Sixth Circuit's ruling stands and the legal battle is over," the statement said.

Slatery pointed out that the law has been constitutional from the start and expressed gratitude to the 6th Circuit Court for its initiative to thoroughly review the district court's decision against it.

"This law was on the books for five years before the district court enjoined it. The Sixth Circuit took the unusual step of having the full court review the district court decision and that of its own panel. We are grateful that the Court recognized the validity of a law passed by the people's representatives and did not substitute its own judgment for the policy decision made by the legislature and the Governor,"

The Washington Times explained that the Tennessee law on spotlight is one that prohibits women to have an abortion unless a 48-hour waiting period has been observed. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in August that it was constitutional and lawful because it didn't violate women's rights.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 9-7 vote that the law did not impose any undue burden on women and actually gives them ample time to reflect accordingly prior to making a major life decision such as an abortion.

"Before making life's big decisions, it is often wise to take time to reflect. The people of Tennessee believed that having an abortion was one of those decisions. Tennessee's waiting-period law is not a substantial obstacle to abortion," the ruling stated.

The ruling reversed Friedman's October 2020 decision that resurrected the dormant lawsuit on the law and put a halt to its five years of enactment. Friedman stated that the law "burdens the majority of abortion patients with significant, and often insurmountable, logistical and financial hurdles."

Friedman's decision also made Tennessee the only state in the country who can not enforce a waiting period for abortions. Accordingly, there are other states that impose waiting periods and at a longer time of 18 to 72 hours. Federal courts have upheld these laws since the constitutional challenge put up against his have not survived any appellate review.

"None of the plaintiffs' witnesses could name specific women who could not get an abortion because the waiting period pushed them past the cutoff date. None of the witnesses could identify specific women whose medical conditions caused complications or psychological harm during the waiting period," the 6th Circuit ruling stressed.