Indiana Supreme Court to hear arguments on state’s near-total abortion ban
INDIANAPOLIS (WISH) — Just one of the two cases arguing against the near-total abortion ban will face scrutiny before the Indiana Supreme Court as lawyers for both sides make their case to the state’s top judges.
The S.B. 1 ban allows for abortions to be performed when the mother’s life is at risk, the fetus is diagnosed with a lethal fetal anomaly and in the case of rape or incest.
Planned Parenthood argues the ban violates Indiana Constitution’s right to privacy and equal privileges protections. Lawyers for ‘Right for Life’ believe this case will not hold up.
“That claim is really preposterous. I mean think of this. The Indiana Constitution was written in 1851. In 1851 abortion was illegal,” said James Bopp, an attorney for Right for Life. “I fully expect the Indiana Supreme Court not to jump off a cliff like really they are being asked to do.”
Planned Parenthood released a statement when the ban was temporarily halted in September 2022. It said in part, “There are 1.5 million people of reproductive age in the state of Indiana, and every single one of them deserves the right to make their own decisions about their bodies, families, and futures.”
Noah Thomas, a Hoosiers at the Supreme Court Protest co-organizer, said, “Abortion rights are human rights and that’s true. It’s not the government’s right, it’s not a politician’s right, it’s their right to their own body. Their body their choice.”
Abortion rights protestors plan to gather starting at 8 a.m. at the statehouse.
“Republicans in general. So hypocritical. ‘We’re the hands-off party,’ said Thomas. “Don’t take away our guns but we’re going to take away a woman’s right to choose. That doesn’t make any sense, does it? They want to run the state like a bible.”
Bopp said, “Everybody agrees that protecting a human life is a fundamental function of government and there is a compelling government interest to do that.”
James Bopp estimates there will be a decision in the next three to six months.
This case is separate from the one filed by Hoosier Jews for Choice arguing religious freedom violations.