A U.S. Appeals Court ruled last week that Indiana health care providers can offer abortion information and out-of-state referrals to minors without parental consent.

Key Takeaways:

• The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court ruling that overturned an Indiana law prohibiting abortion businesses from telling minors how to get an abortion out of state without parental consent.

• The court ruled that the law violated the First Amendment right to free speech.

• The ruling leaves minor girls susceptible to abortion coercion and undermines parental rights.

The Backstory:

In 2017, Indiana passed its “aid-or-assist law," which required health care providers to receive parental permission before discussing abortion with minors.

Following its passage, the legislation was challenged by Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawaii, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky Inc. (PPGNHAIK). It was temporarily halted in 2017 and then permanently struck down in 2024 by U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Barker.

Following Barker's ruling, the state appealed the decision to the Seventh Circuit Court.

The Details:

On August 18, the three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Barker's 2024 decision, ruling that offering abortion information to minors is protected by the First Amendment right to free speech.

Though Indiana law prohibits most abortions, the court said that telling minors how to get an abortion out of state — even without parental knowledge — is legal.

“Indiana officials may disagree with the purposes behind plaintiff’s speech and with the laws and policies of other states. They cannot, however, make it illegal to provide information about lawful conduct in other states,” Judge David Hamilton wrote. “Nor can they apply Indiana’s own parental consent laws to out-of-state abortions.”

Zoom In:

Abortion advocates are hailing the court's decision, but without the law in place, minors are at real risk for abortion coercion without their parents' knowledge.

In arguing for the law during court hearings, Indiana Deputy Solicitor General Jenna Lorence previously pointed out that it is common for parents to give consent for a child's medical procedure.

"There's certainly a strong interest of the state in ensuring that the parent-child bond isn't broken by a child getting medical procedures without their parents' permission, knowledge or consent," Lorence said.

Indiana Right to Life's president and CEO, Mark Fichter, has also noted that the court's ruling endangers girls and undercuts parental rights.

"This ruling places young girls at risk of predatory abortion providers, coerced abortions, and abortions without informed consent,” Fichter said following Judge Barker's ruling in 2024. “It also opens the door for Indiana abortion providers to sell abortions to young girls across state borders – all without parents knowing.”

The Bottom Line:

The state has a duty to ensure young girls are safe from abortion businesses who will likely convince them that abortion is their only option. This ruling now leaves minors susceptible to a predatory industry, without protection from their parents.