Judge dismisses abortion records lawsuit
Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A Marion County judge on Tuesday dismissed a case that sought to overturn a state agency’s decision to exempt terminated pregnancy reports from public record—though an appeal in the case is almost certainly guaranteed.
Superior Court Judge Timothy Oakes ruled in favor of the Indiana Department of Health, which stopped sharing the reports following the state’s adoption of a near-total abortion ban. The state agency believes the reports are medical records and could be used to identify people seeking abortions due to the level of detail required and the small number of procedures occurring.
Among the data collected on the terminated pregnancy reports, or TPRs for short, is the age, education and marital status of the woman, the date of the abortion, gestational age of the fetus, race and ethnicity of the woman, as well as the city and county where the abortion occurred. They also list the name of the doctor, which outside groups have used to file licensing complaints.
The department still releases an aggregate report quarterly.
Oakes praised both IDOH and plaintiff Voices for Life, an anti-abortion South Bend group, for well-written briefs and well-presented oral arguments.
“Usually, these make a Court’s job easier. However, as with most cases of statutory interpretation, legislative intent, word choice, placement and other interpretative analysis and arguments, make this decision a little less clear,” Oakes wrote in the two-page ruling.
“In the end, the Courts are obligated to follow the law as written, regardless of personal beliefs, electoral pressures, or potential non-judicial consequences or outcomes,” Oakes added.
He said both Congress and the Indiana General Assembly have made their intention to protect medical information clear—but had also made a commitment to transparency.
The ruling adds that Voices for Life “may very well find relief in an appellate Court’s analysis or, more likely, at the Indiana Legislature.”
In Friday’s hearing, Oakes called the process a “three-stop train,” acknowledging the likelihood the case will end up at the Indiana Supreme Court.
At the hearing, Patrick Gillen, an attorney for the plaintiffs, indicated his intent to file an appeal. He described the General Assembly as a last resort, saying that legislative “sausage-making” could prevent Voices for Life from “vindicat(ing) their rights.”
Voices for Life has institutional support, however. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has publicly sided with the group and gone against IDOH, a state agency he represents in court.
The conflict of interest spurred a brief spat over legal representation. At least one attorney has filed a disciplinary grievance with the board overseeing Rokita’s law license, WFYI reported.
Rokita, a Republican who is up for election in November, will face Democrat Destiny Wells, who celebrated the decision in a statement Tuesday.
“The dismissal of this case is a win for medical privacy,” Wells said. “Hoosiers are done with Todd Rokita’s blatant waste of taxpayer dollars.”
Indiana Capital Chronicle Reporter Leslie Bonilla Muñiz contributed to this story. The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.