Judge blocks pro-life Indiana law under guise of 'religious freedom'

An Indiana court has blocked the state's law protecting virtually all preborn children from abortion in cases when women claim the law violates their religious freedom.

Key Takeaways:

• In 2023, Indiana's Senate Bill 1 (SB1) took effect, protecting nearly all preborn children from abortion.

• The ACLU sued to have the law overturned, claiming it violates religious freedom.

• A temporary injunction had already been placed on the law, and a new court ruling has made that injunction permanent, with both agreeing the law violates plaintiffs' religious freedom.

• Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita said the state will appeal the decision.

The Backstory:

The Indiana General Assembly passed SB1 in 2022, which protects most preborn children from abortion and has exceptions included for the life or health of the mother, rape or incest, and when the child is expected to die during pregnancy or at birth.

The ACLU sued on behalf of five women, along with Hoosier Jews for Choice, claiming the law violates the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

In December of 2022, Marion County Superior Court Judge Heather Welch ruled in favor of the ACLU, and placed a temporary injunction against the law.

The state of Indiana appealed the ruling, and in 2024, the appeals court agreed with Welch, upholding the injunction; however, the appeals court also said the injunction needed to be narrower.

Decision issued in religious-based abortion lawsuit

“We conclude that Hoosier Jews for Choice has associational standing, that Plaintiffs’ claims are ripe, and that the class action certification was not an abuse of discretion,” the ruling said. “Although we find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting injunctive relief, the preliminary injunction is overly broad because it enjoins enforcement of the Abortion Law in ways that do not violate RFRA. We therefore affirm but remand for entry of a narrower injunction.”

The Details:

Marion County Superior Court Judge Christina R. Klineman has issued a permanent injunction against SB1, though she did narrow it to only affect those who claim it violates their religious beliefs.

“This Permanent Injunction is meant simply to capture those rare instances where an abortion does not fall within the enumerated exceptions but is likewise a necessary religious exercise,” her decision said (emphasis added).

In a press release, the ACLU celebrated the ruling, saying it protects people of "many faiths," as the two final plaintiffs are not both Jewish, and the injunction does not only apply to Jewish Indianans.

“Today’s ruling is a recognition that religious freedom protects people of many faiths and beliefs, not just those favored by the state,” Stevie Pactor, Senior Staff Attorney at the ACLU of Indiana, said. “For more than three years, our clients have challenged a law that forces them to choose between their faith and their autonomy. This decision makes it clear that Indiana cannot enforce its abortion ban in ways that violate their religious freedom.”

Yet the description of one of the plaintiffs makes it clear that this is not an issue of legitimate religious freedom; as the lawsuit describes her beliefs:

Anonymous Plaintiff 2 does not belong to a specific religious tradition but has personal religious and spiritual beliefs that guide her life, including her moral and ethical practices.

She does not believe in a single, theistic god, but believes that there is within the universe a supernatural force or power that connects all humans and is larger than any individual person. She believes this could be described as a universal consciousness, and because of this connectedness through a supernatural force, she believes all humans are directed to act in a manner that promotes and does not harm other humans or this community of humanity.

One of her central spiritual beliefs is that people are endowed with bodily autonomy that should not be infringed upon. To do so constitutes a spiritual and moral wrong and inhibits the full expression of a person’s humanity.

Putting aside the hypocrisy of arguing for the killing of preborn children while also claiming to believe that humans are directed to never hurt other humans, accepting this vague description as "religious beliefs" is one of the widest loopholes possible, essentially opening the door to any woman claiming she should be allowed to have an abortion and justifying it with vague and meaningless spiritualized language.

Zoom In:

The issue of when life begins is not an issue of religious belief, but of biology. Science is clear on exactly when life begins, and it is not based on one's individual feelings or beliefs.

Dr. Tara Sander Lee is a molecular geneticist with over 20 years’ experience in academic and clinical medicine, including a fellowship at Harvard Medical School and Boston Children’s Hospital. As a molecular pathology inspector for the College of American Pathologists, 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.”

She added:

Referring to the preborn child as a zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus at different stages of development does nothing to lessen his or her humanity. Those are just ways of referring to age, no different from the terms infant, toddler, adolescent, or adult.

The Pro-Life Reply to: "No One Knows When Life Begins"

The Bottom Line:

Indiana AG Todd Rokita has already issued a statement in response to the ruling.

“We disagree with the court’s decision and have already appealed,” a spokesman said. “As we have with every challenge against our pro-life law, we’ll continue fighting to protect the lives of the unborn.”