POLITICS

Judge halts Indiana's new abortion law

Stephanie Wang
stephanie.wang@indystar.com

 

A federal judge suspended Indiana's new abortion law from going into effect, upholding a woman's right to seek an abortion.

The new law, which was set to go into effect  Friday, would have prohibited abortions sought solely because a fetus had been potentially diagnosed with a disability such as Down syndrome.

But Judge Tanya Walton Pratt said the law likely would be found unconstitutional. It would violate the U.S. Supreme Court precedents, she said, that protect a woman's right to choose an abortion before a fetus is viable, and the right to privacy in making that decision.

The ruling for a preliminary injunction marked a win for Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, which filed the lawsuit challenging the law in April with the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana.

"This cruel law painted a grim picture for Indiana women with its blatant, unwelcome intrusion into private, independent decision-making," said Betty Cockrum, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky.

The law "exerts undue political influence into one of the personal decisions a woman can make," added Jane Henegar, executive director of the ACLU of Indiana.

Social conservatives, including Republican Gov. Mike Pence, had pushed for the law, known as HEA 1337, to protect fetuses against discrimination based on disability. Pratt acknowledged that the state has an interest in protecting and promoting potential life, but said a woman's liberty trumps the state's interest.

The attorney general's office said it will consider whether to appeal the injunction, which will remain in place while the case is decided.

"This ruling is an appalling human rights injustice and we urge the state to appeal," Indiana Right to Life said in a statement. "Abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood turn to activist judges anytime they believe their lucrative businesses are threatened."

The injunction also applies to other contested parts of the law. It stops a requirement for abortion providers to inform patients of the new restrictions, since those restrictions could be overturned.

The law also called for abortion providers to bury or cremate fetal tissue. The state contended that this maintained dignity for the potential life represented by the fetus.

Planned Parenthood argued that a patient who chooses to take possession of the fetal tissue is not held to the same standard under the law and can dispose of it as she sees fit. Planned Parenthood also noted that the burial or cremation requirement could increase its expenses between two- and four-fold.

This was, Pratt wrote, "a much closer call." But she said the court would likely still be to rule in favor of Planned Parenthood, because the law does not recognize a fetus as a person. As such, she said there was "no legal basis for the state to treat fetal remains with 'the same' dignity as human remains."

"To be clear," Pratt wrote, "whether or not an individual views fetal tissue as essentially the same as human remains is each person’s own personal and moral decision. ... The Court cannot resolve this moral question. But as a legal question, there is currently no basis which would allow this Court to recognize fetal tissue as such."

Senate President Pro Tempore David Long, R-Fort Wayne, said in a statement, "For the court to equate fetal remains with any other common medical waste is deeply troubling."

He supported the passage of the abortion law and said he planned to discuss the case and possibility of appeal with the attorney general.

Indiana University has filed a separate lawsuit challenging the law, which would prohibit the transfer or sale of fetal tissue. IU neuroscience researchers use aborted or miscarried fetal tissue to study conditions such as autism and Alzheimer's disease.

Pursuing their research — or even trying to transfer it to a laboratory in another state — could put those scientists in violation of the law.

In 2011, Pratt stopped another state law that cut off funding to health care providers that offered abortions, which briefly blocked 9,300 Medicaid clients from accessing Planned Parenthood services. She also halted a provision of the law that required doctors to tell patients seeking abortions that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks or less. But, at the time, she temporarily upheld a part of the law requiring doctors to tell patients that life begins at fertilization.

Will enough GOP women stick with Gov. Mike Pence?

Planned Parenthood sues to stop abortion law

What Supreme Court's abortion ruling means for Indiana

IndyStar reporter Chelsea Schneider and Kristine Guerra contributed to this story. 

Call IndyStar reporter Stephanie Wang at (317) 444-6184. Follow her on Twitter: @stephaniewang.