Iowa’s fetal heartbeat law was struck down by a district court Tuesday.

The law, which Governor Kim Reynolds signed in May, would have banned abortions once a fetal heartbeat could be detected at about 6 weeks.

Judge Michael Huppert of Iowa’s Fifth Judicial District ruled the law unconstitutional based on Article 1, Sections 6 and 9 of the Iowa Constitution, according to the ruling on the motion released Tuesday.

According to Section 6, “the general assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens.”

Section 9 guarantees all Iowans the right to due process and trial by jury.

According to the ruling, the law’s contains a “restriction upon a woman’s fundamental right to terminate a pregnancy” that makes it “violative of both the due process and equal protection provisions of the Iowa Constitution.”

Nicole Whitlock, outreach chair for College Democrats, said she was pleased to hear about the decision, which she views as a victory for gender equality.

“I just think that that law was extremely detrimental to all women in Iowa, especially students who, you know, younger people are usually the ones who get abortions,” Whitlock said. “People, especially people in college, don’t have the money, the resources, the time to have a child. It’s really vital to all people in college to have an equal opportunity to graduate, to reach their full potential.”

The ruling was largely based on Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of the Heartland v. Reynolds, ex rel. State, an Iowa case which reaffirmed the right to terminate a pregnancy in 2018.

College Republicans President Jacob Minock said he understood the precedent for the ruling against the fetal heartbeat law, but he is hopeful higher courts will turn over those decisions.

“I certainly do see, based on that [previous ruling], where [this ruling] comes from,” Minock said. “That being said, I don’t necessarily agree with that initial ruling that was used to justify this current one, and I could see that initial ruling being overturned by another judge and this one would become moot.”

Minock referenced anti-abortion legislation in Missouri and South Carolina as an indication of “something bigger that will be happening across the country.”

College Democrats President Taylor Blair said he believes the law and any appeals of the ruling are part of a “moral crusade,” in which lawmakers are diverting time and resources from other issues, as an attempt to restrict abortion nationwide.

“I think it’s important to note that some of the legislators who passed this bill knew it wasn’t going to stand up to a court challenge,” Blair said. “Their whole goal was that it would get stopped in court, and it would go all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court where they want to overturn abortion rights for the whole country. They knew this was going to get held up in the courts.”

In a joint statement from the ACLU of Iowa and Planned Parenthood of the Heartland on Tuesday, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Medical Director Jill Meadows described the decision as “a victory for every Iowan who has ever needed or will need a safe, legal abortion.”

Francine Thompson, executive director of the Emma Goldman Clinic, which joined Planned Parenthood as a plaintiff in the case, joined in the statement, saying she was proud to celebrate the decision with her partners.

“It is befitting that as we celebrate the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, our clients can continue to rely on access to first and second trimester abortions at the Emma Goldman Clinic,” Thompson said.

The Family Leader, an Urbandale-based Christian organization also released a statement Tuesday in response to the ruling.

“On June 29 last year, the Iowa Supreme Court claimed for itself the power to amend the Iowa Constitution without even a vote of the people, and then it went way beyond even Roe v. Wade to concoct a ‘right’ to abortion,” The Family Leader said in their statement. “That’s outrageous judicial activism, and it’s wrong. Today’s decision is just the next, egregious consequence of that rogue ruling.”

Whitlock said she believes Tuesday’s ruling, and the cases cited as precedent, were the correct decisions and should be accepted by lawmakers.

“I don’t think it would be worth even wasting time on the Republicans’ side to even bring it up again,” Whitlock said.

While Minock said he understood the ruling based on the precedent, he was unsure the precedent was a correct application of the law.

“I did read the ruling,” Minock said. “I do understand where the judge is coming from; I see that aspect of it. However, on the flip side, I don’t think this is anywhere near over.”

The group included a petition form in their statement, which will be included in a “friend of the court” brief they will file if the decision is appealed.

According to the Cedar Rapids Gazette, “In December, both sides indicated whoever loses likely would expect to appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court.”