Indiana court blocks state abortion restrictions in lawsuit claiming religious objections

An Indiana court blocked the state’s near-total abortion ban March 5 in response to a class action lawsuit claiming the ban violated religious freedom protections.

In 2022, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed a class-action lawsuit claiming that Indiana’s Senate Enrolled Act 1 (S.E.A. 1), which prohibits most abortions in the state, violates Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of an organization called Hoosier Jews for Choice, and five women who claimed they held sincere religious beliefs that they must be able to obtain an abortion under circumstances prohibited by the law, the ACLU of Indiana said at the time.

In a 17-page ruling, Marion County Judge Christina R. Klineman blocked the law from being enforced against the plaintiffs, as well as any Indiana resident who objects to the ban on religious grounds.

“The court finds that there is significant public interest in ensuring the religious freedom of all citizens and the state’s position that religious freedom is somehow less important than other exceptions in the abortion law puts the court in an untenable position and finds a permanent injunction the only proper relief,” Klineman wrote.

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita appealed the ruling. His office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from OSV News.

Stevie Pactor, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Indiana, argued in a March 5 statement that the ruling is “a recognition that religious freedom protects people of many faiths and beliefs, not just those favored by the state.”

“For more than three years, our clients have challenged a law that forces them to choose between their faith and their autonomy,” Pactor said. “This decision makes it clear that Indiana cannot enforce its abortion ban in ways that violate their religious freedom.”

While some proponents of expanding abortion access have argued that religious freedom claims could be a legal avenue to circumvent or even block abortion bans, abortion opponents criticized the litigation strategy.

Alexander Mingus, executive director of the Indiana Catholic Conference, said in a March 7 statement, “Indiana’s religious freedom laws were passed for the purpose of protecting religious practice, not to protect the ending of a human life.”

“Religions that preach violence are not protected by religious freedom claims,” Mingus said. “While the court’s decision is disappointing, the Catholic Church in Indiana remains committed to upholding the dignity of all life and concretely supporting women with difficult pregnancies.”

In a March 6 statement, Mike Fichter, Indiana Right to Life president and chief executive officer, argued, “For the court to rule that taking the life of an unborn child is an exercise of religious freedom is deeply distressing — and a perversion of the law’s intent.”

“Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act was never intended to equate taking the life of an unborn child with religious expression in our state,” Fichter said. “While this current injunction is limited to the plaintiffs in the case only, if it withstands challenge, it will be exploited so anyone claiming a spiritual belief, even if personal and non-theistic, can justify taking a child’s life.”

Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., wrote on X the ruling was “outrageous” and argued the judge should be impeached.

“Indiana’s abortion law serves the purpose of protecting unborn life and should be upheld,” he said.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which works to elect pro-life candidates to public office, argued on X, “We’re confident this absurd ruling will not stand.”

Indiana’s law permits abortion up to 10 weeks gestation only in instances of rape or incest and up to 20 weeks gestation only in cases of lethal fetal anomalies, or when the mother’s life is in danger from specific medical issues. The law also requires that abortions take place at a hospital or a hospital-owned surgery center.

The Catholic Church teaches that all human life is sacred from conception to natural death, and as such, opposes direct abortion.

The reality of the abortion pill

Lawsuit continues to challenge Biden-era regulation adding abortion to pregnant worker protections

Supreme Court leaves in place mail-order distribution of mifepristone during legal challenge

New Senate bill aims to protect privacy for charitable donors following pregnancy center case

Makary out as FDA commissioner after tumultuous tenure, pro-life criticism

As Planned Parenthood defunding nears expiration, USCCB pro-life chair backs bill to block funds

Copyright © 2026 OSV News

 Print