SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Reproductive rights advocates in Indiana protested then-Gov. Mike Pence's anti-choice legislation in April of 2016. (Photo: @MaureenHayden/Twitter)
In 'Victory for Women,' Appeals Court Upholds Ban on Pence's Indiana Law Requiring Ultrasounds Before Abortions
"This is another repudiation of the unnecessary and unconstitutional attempts by Indiana politicians to interfere with women's reproductive rights."
Jul 26, 2018
Reproductive rights groups celebrated "a victory for women" after a federal appeals court upheld a ban on a provision in an Indiana law--signed by former governor and current Vice President Mike Pence--that forced any woman considering an abortion to undergo an ultrasound 18 hours before the procedure.
A three-member panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday determined that the mandated waiting period in House Enrolled Act (HEA) 1337 imposes an unconstitutional "undue burden" on women, and upheld U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt's March 2017 injunction in a 51-page ruling (pdf).
"Rhetoric and persuasion are certainly legitimate methods for a state to assert its preference, but it cannot force compliance with its otherwise legitimate views by erecting barriers to abortion without evidence that those barriers serve the benefit the state intended," wrote Judge Ilana Rovner. "It appears that [the measure's] only effect is to place barriers between a woman who wishes to exercise her right to an abortion and her ability to do so."
"HEA 1337 would require Hoosiers to make two trips to their provider--a time-consuming and expensive process. We are glad the court saw that there is no medical or legal justification for these rules, which would be especially burdensome for rural residents and people with low incomes," responded Christie Gillespie, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK)--which brought the case challenging the law, with assistance from the ACLU of Indiana.
"The ruling affirms that deeply personal decisions about abortion should be made by women in consultation with their doctors, not politicians pursuing an extreme ideological agenda," declared ACLU of Indiana executive director Jane Henegar.
Ken Falk, the group's legal director, added, "This is another repudiation of the unnecessary and unconstitutional attempts by Indiana politicians to interfere with women's reproductive rights."
As Brandon J. Smith, the statehouse bureau chief for Indiana Public Broadcasting, noted in a series of tweets, this is just the latest blow to efforts by Indiana's right-wing lawmakers to restrict a woman's right to choose.
Reproductive rights advocates have warned that such efforts are part of a broader ploy by the anti-choice movement to force the U.S. Supreme Court--which could soon have another far-right, Trump-appointed justice--to reconsider its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling and outlaw all abortions nationwide.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Reproductive rights groups celebrated "a victory for women" after a federal appeals court upheld a ban on a provision in an Indiana law--signed by former governor and current Vice President Mike Pence--that forced any woman considering an abortion to undergo an ultrasound 18 hours before the procedure.
A three-member panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday determined that the mandated waiting period in House Enrolled Act (HEA) 1337 imposes an unconstitutional "undue burden" on women, and upheld U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt's March 2017 injunction in a 51-page ruling (pdf).
"Rhetoric and persuasion are certainly legitimate methods for a state to assert its preference, but it cannot force compliance with its otherwise legitimate views by erecting barriers to abortion without evidence that those barriers serve the benefit the state intended," wrote Judge Ilana Rovner. "It appears that [the measure's] only effect is to place barriers between a woman who wishes to exercise her right to an abortion and her ability to do so."
"HEA 1337 would require Hoosiers to make two trips to their provider--a time-consuming and expensive process. We are glad the court saw that there is no medical or legal justification for these rules, which would be especially burdensome for rural residents and people with low incomes," responded Christie Gillespie, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK)--which brought the case challenging the law, with assistance from the ACLU of Indiana.
"The ruling affirms that deeply personal decisions about abortion should be made by women in consultation with their doctors, not politicians pursuing an extreme ideological agenda," declared ACLU of Indiana executive director Jane Henegar.
Ken Falk, the group's legal director, added, "This is another repudiation of the unnecessary and unconstitutional attempts by Indiana politicians to interfere with women's reproductive rights."
As Brandon J. Smith, the statehouse bureau chief for Indiana Public Broadcasting, noted in a series of tweets, this is just the latest blow to efforts by Indiana's right-wing lawmakers to restrict a woman's right to choose.
Reproductive rights advocates have warned that such efforts are part of a broader ploy by the anti-choice movement to force the U.S. Supreme Court--which could soon have another far-right, Trump-appointed justice--to reconsider its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling and outlaw all abortions nationwide.
Reproductive rights groups celebrated "a victory for women" after a federal appeals court upheld a ban on a provision in an Indiana law--signed by former governor and current Vice President Mike Pence--that forced any woman considering an abortion to undergo an ultrasound 18 hours before the procedure.
A three-member panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday determined that the mandated waiting period in House Enrolled Act (HEA) 1337 imposes an unconstitutional "undue burden" on women, and upheld U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt's March 2017 injunction in a 51-page ruling (pdf).
"Rhetoric and persuasion are certainly legitimate methods for a state to assert its preference, but it cannot force compliance with its otherwise legitimate views by erecting barriers to abortion without evidence that those barriers serve the benefit the state intended," wrote Judge Ilana Rovner. "It appears that [the measure's] only effect is to place barriers between a woman who wishes to exercise her right to an abortion and her ability to do so."
"HEA 1337 would require Hoosiers to make two trips to their provider--a time-consuming and expensive process. We are glad the court saw that there is no medical or legal justification for these rules, which would be especially burdensome for rural residents and people with low incomes," responded Christie Gillespie, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK)--which brought the case challenging the law, with assistance from the ACLU of Indiana.
"The ruling affirms that deeply personal decisions about abortion should be made by women in consultation with their doctors, not politicians pursuing an extreme ideological agenda," declared ACLU of Indiana executive director Jane Henegar.
Ken Falk, the group's legal director, added, "This is another repudiation of the unnecessary and unconstitutional attempts by Indiana politicians to interfere with women's reproductive rights."
As Brandon J. Smith, the statehouse bureau chief for Indiana Public Broadcasting, noted in a series of tweets, this is just the latest blow to efforts by Indiana's right-wing lawmakers to restrict a woman's right to choose.
Reproductive rights advocates have warned that such efforts are part of a broader ploy by the anti-choice movement to force the U.S. Supreme Court--which could soon have another far-right, Trump-appointed justice--to reconsider its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling and outlaw all abortions nationwide.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.