After a year-long legal battle, the Iowa Supreme Court rejected on Friday a proposed 72-hour waiting period for abortions in the state.The ruling reverses a lower court decision, calling the law unconstitutional.The Iowa Supreme Court sided with Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa in a 5-2 vote.The two dissenting judges were Justices Thomas Waterman & Edward Mansfield. Mansfield wrote the dissent and is reportedly on President Donald Trump's short list to replace U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kennedy.Chief Justice Mark Cady wrote that the statute requiring a 72-hour waiting period violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the Iowa Constitution. "Today's decision was a powerful recognition that women and men are protected equally under our state constitution,” said Rita Bettis Austen, with the ACLU of Iowa.Anti-abortion advocates, including Chuck Hurley with Family Leader, said most justices are missing one crucial component."Anybody, any eighth-grade, you know, social studies student or anyone can read the Iowa Constitution and see that the right to life is the very first right mentioned,” Hurley said.The waiting period is a part of 20-week abortion ban law passed in 2017. Austen said Friday’s decision is the end of the road for the legal fight on mandatory waiting periods.“The Iowa Supreme Court is the final word on abortion rights under the Iowa Constitution, and this opinion cannot be appealed to the federal courts."The ACLU of Iowa took the same legal approach with Iowa's most recent abortion legislation -- the fetal heartbeat law. A lawsuit against the fetal heartbeat law has been filed in Polk County Court. An injunction against the law is in place until the legal battle is over.Despite the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision on 72-hour waiting periods, Hurley said Justice Anthony Kennedy's retirement announcement gives him hope that abortion issues will make it to the highest court in the country. "I think the chances went up 10,000-fold this week that this case will be heard in the federal courts,” he said.Gov. Kim Reynolds issued a statement on the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision, saying, "I am disappointed in this morning's ruling. Often, women are in crisis when facing this decision, and it's a decision that can impact them for the rest of their lives. “I don't think it is unreasonable to require 72 hours for someone to weigh their options and the important decision they are about to make."Meanwhile, Democratic candidate for governor Fred Hubbell said, "For a lot of people, 72-hours means that they have to take at least two different trips to a doctor, and for a lot of people that's two days off of work and it costs a lot of money. “People don't necessarily have access to transportation and two days off of work. So, it's really discriminatory in terms of how it impacts a lot of people."