Seventh Circuit: Indiana Aid-or-Assist Statute Unconstitutional

• The Seventh Circuit has struck down Indiana's 'aid-or-assist' statute, finding it unconstitutional.
• The law prohibited doctors and abortion providers from sharing information about out-of-state abortions with minors without parental consent or court approval.
• The ruling is consistent with the Ninth Circuit's earlier decision against a similar Idaho law.
• This decision may have implications for similar laws in other states.

In a significant ruling, the Seventh Circuit has struck down Indiana's 'aid-or-assist' statute, which prohibited doctors and abortion providers from sharing information about out-of-state abortions with minors without parental consent or court approval. The law was challenged by Planned Parenthood in 2017, before it took effect, and the organization argued that the statute is both a content and viewpoint-based speech restriction. The Seventh Circuit panel agreed, finding that the law allows conversations on abortion but forbids a certain point of view. This ruling has implications for similar laws in other states, which may be subject to constitutional challenges. The court's decision was consistent with the Ninth Circuit's earlier ruling against a similar Idaho law, which also found that such restrictions violate the First Amendment.

At its core, the aid-or-assist statute regulates what information abortion providers can share with minors. The law does not prohibit sharing information about out-of-state abortions for prenatal care or sexually transmitted infections, but it does trigger if the information is about abortion. This distinction highlights the viewpoint-based nature of the statute, which prohibits speech that aids an unemancipated minor in obtaining an abortion without specific parental consent. The court's analysis was thorough, with Judge Hamilton noting that the law allows conversations on abortion but forbids a certain point of view. He also acknowledged that speech aiding an unemancipated minor in obtaining an illegal abortion in Indiana would constitute speech integral to criminal conduct.

This ruling has significant implications for reproductive rights and free speech. By striking down the aid-or-assist statute, the Seventh Circuit has sent a clear message that viewpoint-based restrictions on speech are unconstitutional. This decision may embolden challenges to similar laws in other states, which could have far-reaching consequences for reproductive healthcare. Lawyers should take note of this ruling and be prepared to advise clients on the constitutionality of such restrictions.

Lawyers should watch for the potential implications of this ruling on similar laws in other states, and be prepared to advise clients on the constitutionality of such restrictions.

Source: Original reporting via Courthouse News Service