{"id":311826,"date":"2024-05-06T06:38:10","date_gmt":"2024-05-06T11:38:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=311826"},"modified":"2024-05-06T10:58:05","modified_gmt":"2024-05-06T15:58:05","slug":"federal-judge-strikes-indiana-law-minors-abortions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/federal-judge-strikes-indiana-law-minors-abortions\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal judge strikes down Indiana law meant to protect minors from coerced abortions"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

A federal judge has struck down<\/a> an Indiana law which had prohibited health care providers from giving information to minors about how to obtain an abortion out-of-state without parental consent.<\/p>\n

Known as the \u201caid-or-assist statute,\u201d the law protected minors from being coerced into abortions, especially without parental consent. The legislation was challenged by Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawaii, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky Inc. (PPGNHAIK) in a push for more abortion \u2014 even if minors are at risk.<\/p>\n

U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Barker sided with PPGNHAIK, saying that the law would violate the First Amendment if enforced against the health care provider. This same judge has also ruled that an Indiana school district didn’t discriminate<\/a> when disallowing a pro-life club on a high school campus. Judge Barker appears to have had an unpredictable, mixed record<\/a> over the years, at times<\/a> striking down numerous pro-life laws<\/a> in the state while allowing others to stand<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cThus, contrary to the State’s contention, the aid-or-assist statute does not simply restrict PPGNHAIK’s speech only as it relates to immature, dependent minors, but would also prevent PPGNHAIK and its physicians from speaking or otherwise communicating about out-of-state abortion care, even to minors who have parental consent for their abortion or who would be deemed mature enough to make the abortion decision for themselves but for whatever reason are not seeking to comply with Indiana’s parental consent and\/or judicial bypass procedures,\u201d Barker wrote<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The abortion industry quickly praised the ruling, since state law protects most preborn children from abortion.<\/p>\n

\u201cGiven Indiana\u2019s near-total ban on abortions in the state, it is extremely important that medical providers and other persons retain the ability to inform patients, including minors, of their out-of-state options for receiving this vital health care,” said Gavin Rose, senior staff attorney for ACLU of Indiana.<\/p>\n

Pro-life groups in the state, however, decried the decision.<\/p>\n