The Kentucky Court of Appeals has overturned a lower court ruling, allowing a Jewish woman to move forward with a lawsuit challenging the state’s pro-life law.
Key Takeaways:
- In 2022, three Jewish women filed a lawsuit claiming Kentucky’s law protecting preborn children from abortion violated their religious freedom.
- In 2024, Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge Brian Edwards ruled against the three women and dismissed their lawsuit.
- The Kentucky Court of Appeals has overturned Edwards’ decision for one of the women, Jessica Kalb, ruling that she has standing to sue.
The Details:
In the original lawsuit, Kalb, along with Sarah Baron and Lisa Sobel, said the Kentucky law’s statement that life begins at conception is a religious belief which is keeping them from growing their families.
Kalb, who has polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), has nine embryos currently frozen, but said she cannot implant them out of her fear of pregnancy complications. “I have these nine embryos that are viable. I only needed one transfer to become pregnant,” she said at the time. “The way the law is written, I could have to deal with nine pregnancies. And I’m 33, about to be 34. It’s a really scary situation, especially to have all of this publicly known.”
Edwards was not swayed, though, ruling that “alleged injuries … are hypothetical as none are currently pregnant or undergoing IVF at the present time.”
The Kentucky Court of Appeals ruled that, for Kalb specifically, there is standing for the case to continue, and sent it back to the lower court. The court pointed to Kalb cancelling an implantation in 2022, as well as her continuing to keep the embryos frozen, as proof of standing.
“Should she continue to do so in perpetuity because the government will not clarify what she can and can’t do with them? No,” the ruling reads. “This is not a speculative issue because these embryos currently exist, and Ms. Kalb is entitled to know her options without fear of potential legal peril.”
In a statement, Kalb’s Attorney Ben Potash said, “Kentucky’s abortion law is incoherent, internally inconsistent, and based in definitions that really make no sense medically or scientifically, and that has big legal repercussions when it comes to due process and even something like separation of powers.”
Kalb gave a statement to the Kentucky Lantern further claiming pro-life laws violate her religious freedom.
“I need to call on everyone who stands for religious freedom, women’s rights and those who believe medical decisions should happen in the sacred space between a doctor and their patient to stand with us as we try to explain why these laws are unjust,” she said. “I want so badly to grow my family. The current (presidential) administration has claimed to support IVF without understanding how limiting my access to reproductive healthcare is damaging. The fact that lawmakers who don’t understand healthcare or my religious beliefs have more rights to my body than I do is sickening.”
Attorney General Russell Coleman, however, said there is nothing in Kentucky law preventing Kalb from undergoing IVF. “Access to IVF is fully protected for Kentuckians hoping to grow their families,” Coleman said. “We are confident the circuit court will agree once again.”
Edwards now has to rule on the merits of the case, and not on whether or not Kalb has standing.
The Background:
As previously reported by Live Action News, Kentucky’s law states:
No person may knowingly
1. Administer to, prescribe for, or sell to any pregnant woman any medicine, drug, or other substance with the specific intent of causing or abetting the termination of the life of an unborn human being; or
2. Use or employ any instrument or procedure upon a pregnant woman with the specific intent of causing or abetting the termination of the life of an unborn human being.
As Live Action News noted, “The keywords here are ‘specific intent.’ This means that a doctor may not intentionally kill a preborn baby. It doesn’t mean that a preterm delivery or emergency C-section cannot be carried out in an emergency. But the Kentucky legislature also included the following verbiage in the law (emphasis added):
The following shall not be a violation of subsection (3) of this section:
… (b) Medical treatment provided to the mother by a licensed physician which results in the accidental or unintentional injury or death to the unborn human being.
Go Deeper:
Despite the claims from Kalb and her pro-abortion attorney, pro-life laws do not violate religious freedom — and saying life begins at conception is not a religious belief, but one based in science.
Dr. Tara Sander Lee is a molecular geneticist with over 20 years of experience in academic and clinical medicine, including a fellowship at Harvard Medical School and Boston Children’s Hospital, and a molecular pathology inspector for the College of American Pathologists. In a video for Live Action, she explained that it is a scientific certainty that life begins at fertilization.
“At the moment a sperm fuses with an egg (known as fertilization or conception), a new, unique human being that is genetically distinct from both parents comes into existence,” Lee explained in a video for Live Action. “Gender, ethnicity, hair color, eye color, and countless other traits are determined at that moment. This genetic blueprint remains the same for his or her entire life, and no other human being past or future will have one identical to it.”
Still, a similar lawsuit was successful in Indiana. A group of five women, as well as Hoosier Jews for Choice, claimed Indiana law violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
Kelsey Hazzard, the founder and president of Secular Pro-Life, said the ruling was so broad, that it essentially made human sacrifice legal under Indiana law in the name of religious freedom. “If a state permits a single legal abortion, by this logic, it must permit abortions for anyone who claims a religious motivation,” she said, adding, “And here’s the kicker: they forgot that Indiana has similar exceptions to homicide. […] Because Indiana has legislated at least two exceptions to its homicide law, Indiana does not have a compelling interest in enforcing that law against religiously motivated murderers. Let the legal human sacrifices and honor killings begin!”
Follow Live Action News on Facebook and Instagram for more pro-life news.
