Planned Parenthood challenging new Indiana abortion parental consent law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky has filed a lawsuit challenging portions of Senate Enrolled Act 404, which in part requires unemancipated minors to obtain consent from a parent or legal guardian before being allowed to have an abortion.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed the lawsuit Thursday in federal court in Indianapolis. PPINK and the ACLU maintain portions of the new law — which goes into effect July 1 — violate equal protection and due process under the U.S. Constitution as well as the First Amendment.

Gov. Eric Holcomb signed SEA 404 into law last month, which says for a minor under the age of 18 to obtain an abortion, her parent, legal guardian or custodian must accompany her and provide written consent and government-issued proof of identification. When he signed the legislation into law, Holcomb said he saw it as a "parental rights issue."

If the unemancipated minor objects to having obtain consent, she can petition the juvenile court for a waiver of parental consent and notification. The new law allows the juvenile court to order the minor’s attorney to serve the parent or legal guardian notice by certified mail or personal notice.

The court could waive the parental notification requirement if it finds having the abortion without parental notification is in the minor’s best interests. A minor denied wavier can appeal.  

The lawsuit doesn’t challenge SEA 404 as a whole, only Section 4, the parental consent aspect and process a physician must follow to certify the relationship between the minor and parent, and Section 4.2(a), regarding preventing someone from assisting an unemancipated pregnant minor in obtaining an abortion without the consent required under Section 4.

PPINK maintains this section violates the First Amendment as it prohibits the organization from advising its minor patients and people seeking abortion services that they can travel to other states where consent may not be required to obtain abortions.

It is seeking a preliminary injunction — later to be made permanent — preventing these two sections from taking effect.

“If this law is allowed to go into effect, it will have a chilling effect on teenagers already dealing with a difficult situation,” said Betty Cockrum, president and CEO of PPINK. “We encourage teenagers to have open and honest conversations with their family members, but unfortunately not every teenager is in an environment where that is safe. This law seeks to stifle open and fully informed conversation between our staff and our patients. Patients should know all options regarding their pregnancies. It is blatantly unconstitutional and is entirely without compassion for vulnerable Hoosiers.”

"For over four decades, courts have confirmed that this constitutional right extends to unemancipated minors who have been deemed, by a judge, to be sufficiently mature to make a decision to obtain an abortion without parental consent, Jane Henegar, executive director of the ACLU of Indiana, said in a statement. "SEA 404 imposes new burdens on a young woman’s access to abortion and on her health care providers, in violation of often reaffirmed constitutional rights.”

The Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill said his staff is reviewing the lawsuit. "We look forward to defending the rights of parents and the welfare of children that are under attack by this lawsuit," he said.



Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Or does the study merely wish they fade away? “It just hasn’t risen substantially in decades,” Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law told Law360. “What we should be looking for is progress, and that’s not what we’re seeing.” PROGRESS = less white males in leadership. Thus the heading and honest questions here ....

  2. One need not wonder why we are importing sex slaves into North America. Perhaps these hapless victims of human trafficking were being imported for a book of play with the Royal Order of Jesters? Indianapolis hosts these major pervs in a big way .... I wonder what affect they exert on Hoosier politics? And its judiciary? A very interesting program on their history and preferences here:

  3. Joseph Buser, Montgomery County Chief Prosecutor, has been involved in both representing the State of Indiana as Prosecutor while filing as Representing Attorney on behalf of himself and the State of Indiana in Civil Proceedings for seized cash and merchandise using a Verified Complaint For Forfeiture of Motor Vehicle, Us Currency And Reimbursement Of Costs, as is evident in Montgomery County Circuit Court Case Number 54C01-1401-MI-000018, CCS below, seen before Judge Harry Siamas, and filed on 01/13/2014. Sheriff Mark Castille is also named. All three defendants named by summons have prior convictions under Mr. Buser, which as the Indiana Supreme Court, in the opinion of The Matter of Mark R. McKinney, No. 18S00-0905-DI-220, stated that McKinney created a conflict of interest by simultaneously prosecuting drug offender cases while pocketing assets seized from defendants in those cases. All moneys that come from forfeitures MUST go to the COMMON SCHOOL FUND.

  4. I was incarcerated at that time for driving while suspended I have no felonies...i was placed on P block I remember several girls and myself asking about voting that day..and wasn't given a answer or means of voting..we were told after the election who won that was it.

  5. The number one way to reduce suffering would be to ban the breeding of fighting dogs. Fighting dogs maim and kill victim dogs Fighting dogs are the most essential piece of dog fighting Dog fighting will continue as long as fighting dogs are struggling to reach each other and maul another fih.longaphernalia