Indiana’s abortion ban can no longer be enforced after a judge issued a final court order Thursday declaring the law violates a heretofore unknown religious…
Indiana’s abortion ban can no longer be enforced after a judge issued a final court order Thursday declaring the law violates a heretofore unknown religious freedom to abort children.
In a peculiar twist on religious rights, Marion Superior Court Judge Christina Klineman ruled the state’s abortion law violates Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act because it allows exceptions for rape but not religion.
“The fact that the Abortion Law expressly allows for abortion in other circumstances, in at least one circumstance at any gestational age, demonstrates the lack of a compelling interest in ‘protecting life’ under all circumstances and from fertilization,” wrote Klineman, a Democrat who has been on the bench since 2014. Her current term expires at the end of this year.
The decision astounded pro-life advocates.
“For the court to rule that taking the life of an unborn child is an exercise of religious freedom is deeply distressing and a perversion of the law’s intent,” Indiana Right to Life President and CEO Mike Fichter said in a statement.
Fichter said the ruling could allow people to claim personal beliefs or religion as justification for abortion.
“Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act was never intended to equate taking the life of an unborn child with religious expression in our state.”
Two anonymous women petitioned in favor of the permanent injunction.
One woman said she does not belong to a specific religion or tradition but “has personal religious and spiritual beliefs that guide her life, including her moral and ethical practices.”
She said those beliefs direct people to act in ways that “promotes and does not harm other humans” or humanity as a whole.
However, she also argued it is her “spiritual obligation” to decide whether to remain pregnant. She said she previously had an abortion because of her beliefs.
“… If a pregnancy or the birth of another child would not allow her to fully realize her humanity and inherent dignity, she should terminate that pregnancy,” the court document says.
She said she does not want to have a child in the future and that the issue has caused anxiety and affected intimacy with her husband.
The second petitioner, a Jewish woman who already has at least one child, said she previously had an abortion based on her religious beliefs.
“[She] believes that her religion instructs her that she cannot imperil her life in that way given that Jewish law instructs her that a fetus is not a life,” the court document says.
The woman said she wants another child but would feel more comfortable trying to conceive if abortion remained legally available.
“She would be much more likely to try to get pregnant if she had certainty regarding her ability to continue to access abortion care.”
Amalia Shifriss, a representative of Hoosier Jews for Choice who advocated for the ruling, said she knows several people who have changed their family planning decisions because of Indiana’s abortion law.
Shifriss said she also does not want to try to become pregnant without access to abortion.
“I know of at least three people, including myself, who got an IUD,” she said. “And I myself really want to have a baby with my new husband, but I am not because I’m over 40 and I’m scared of having an unhealthy pregnancy and not being able to have the health care that I need in the state that I live in.”
Attorney General Todd Rokita has appealed Klineman’s ruling, sending the case to higher courts in an attempt to overturn it.
“We disagree with the court’s decision and have already appealed,” a spokesman from his office said. “As we have with every challenge against our pro-life law, we’ll continue fighting to protect the lives of the unborn.”
“We are encouraged by Attorney General Todd Rokita’s immediate move to appeal this injunction and pray it will be stayed during the appeal process,” Fichter said. “Indiana Right to Life will continue its work to make Indiana a model state in providing compassionate support for pregnant moms and protections for their unborn babies.”
