A federal judge ruled a Wisconsin law requiring doctors performing abortions to get hospital-admitting privileges unconstitutional Friday.

U.S. District Judge William Conley concluded the measure was enacted not for the purpose of women’s health, but rather to create an unnecessary obstacle for women seeking abortions in Wisconsin. This is an “improper purpose” of the law, according to Conley’s decision.

The ruling came after Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and Affiliated Medical Services sued the state. They argued the law would force Wisconsin’s largest abortion-offering clinic to close since their doctors are unable to get hospital-admitting privileges. Conley put the law on hold in 2013, but did not make a decision about its constitutionality until Friday.

Rep. Chris Taylor, D-Madison, said the closure of this large Planned Parenthood clinic would be harmful for women and create too much burden for Wisconsin’s remaining abortion-offering clinics. There are currently only four clinics offering abortions in Wisconsin, so the overflow to remaining clinics would be massive, Taylor said.

“This decision is critical for women to continue to have access safe, legal abortion services,” Taylor said.

Taylor said there was evidence from the start that the main intent of the bill, for which Taylor sat on the health review committee, did not consider women’s health. Taylor said the bill’s authors wanted to shut down abortion services in Wisconsin and would do “whatever it takes” to achieve that goal.

Gov. Scott Walker’s spokesperson, Laurel Patrick, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Walker believes the hospital-admitting law is constitutional and plans to appeal the judge’s decision.

“Our office will work with the attorney general to appeal this ruling, and we believe the law will ultimately be upheld,” Patrick told the Sentinel.

The bill also included other provisions that Conley did not strike down, including requiring abortion-providing clinics to display an ultrasound of the fetus, which has sparked much debate in the years since its original suggestion. This portion of the law was not included in Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit.

Walker — who signed the bill into law in 2013 — also said he would sign a bill banning abortions after 20 weeks if it were to reach his desk in an “open letter on life” earlier this month.

Walker says he would sign bill banning abortions after 20 weeks

This letter was a more conservative stance compared to his refusal to declare whether or not he would sign such a bill during his gubernatorial reelection campaign in 2014.

His more religious stance on abortion has been speculated to be a move to impress Iowa conservatives before the presidential caucus, as Walker appears to be considering a 2016 presidential bid. Appealing the judge’s decision would be in line with the conservative tone of this open letter.

Walker’s open letter on abortion latest move toward emphasizing religious beliefs

Taylor said she does not think this will be the last move by the state’s Republicans to limit access to abortion in Wisconsin. She said she does think the judiciary will continue to rule these future laws unconstitutional.

“Unfortunately, women are really dependent right now on having a judiciary to allow them to make their most personal health care decisions,” Taylor said.