Members of the Medical Licensing Board of Indiana v. Planned Parenthood Great Northwest
Plaintiffs claim that abortion ban violates the state constitution’s 1) substantive due process right to privacy included in the inherent rights clause (Art. I, § 1), 2) guarantee of equal privileges and immunities (Art. I, § 23), and 3) due course of law clause through its unconstitutionally vague language (Art. I, § 12). A trial court preliminarily blocked the ban. After keeping the injunction temporarily in place while it heard an appeal, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled on the merits of whether the Indiana Constitution protects a right to abortion and vacated the trial court’s preliminary injunction. According to the court, the state constitution’s due process right to privacy (Art. I, § 1) does not protect the right to abortion except when necessary to protect the patient’s life or to protect a patient from a serious health risk. Though the court acknowledged that the plaintiffs had previously withdrawn their vagueness claim (Art. I, § 12), it declined to rule on their privileges and immunities claim (Art. I, § 23) since that claim was not part of the appeal.
Related Commentary
Mapping State Supreme Court Abortion Rights Decisions
A new tool from the Center for Reproductive Rights tracks abortion-related state constitutional developments across the country.
A Conversation About Abortion Rights and the Future of State Constitutions
A retired state supreme court justice, a reproductive rights scholar, and the director of the Brennan Center’s Judiciary Program discuss the role of state courts after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that there is no federal constitutional right to abortion.
Trends to Watch in State Abortion Litigation
Courts are considering new foundations for abortion rights, while incremental challenges may slowly chip away at Dobbs.
Indiana Supreme Court Gives Natural Rights a Boost
The high court upheld the state’s abortion ban, but its ruling could be used to protect other liberties in the future.