U.S. Supreme Court lets New York state contraceptive equity law stand

Our opponents will call this ruling a victory. State Sen. Jeff Drozda, R-Westfield: "I think it's a very significant ruling. This does help pave the way for states to begin to look at other legislation. If states are looking to begin to restrict abortion . . . this does allow us to go back and look at what was considered an undue burden.''

This ruling is a victory for no one. It won't help prevent unintended pregnancies or reduce the number of abortions. It won't help anyone access quality and affordable prenatal care, child care, or education. And it certainly won't help those unfortunate women and families who need the best, unbiased, unhampered medical care in a profoundly difficult situation.

We urge you, our supporters accross Indiana: please, do not let this moment pass unnoticed. Share this sad news with friends and ask them to join the Planned Parenthood Action Network.

Donate now to help us organize advocates statewide in order to protect women's health. Every dollar helps. For $25, we can print registration forms for 250 new voters. For $100, we can educate 400 voters. For $500, we can train 40-50 volunteers at a Live Action Camp.

How will this decision affect Indiana women?

The issue at hand in today's decision is the first piece of federal legislation that bans a specific medical procedure, one used in a very small number of cases when something has gone seriously wrong with the pregnancy or the fetus. When the pregnancy threatens the life and health of the woman herself, doctors must be free to make the best medical decision. In this case, by a one-vote margin, the Court took women's health out of the hands of doctors and put it into the hands of state legislators.

Indiana law already prohibits "partial birth abortion". Though legally speaking, it can be considered a vague and unenforceable law (because lawmakers did not choose to define "partial birth abortion," nor is the term defined in medicine), it has probably caused doctors to chose another method even if it was less safe for the patient. The impact on Indiana women will likely reach much farther than the few who need this procedure.

Since 1973, Indiana's legislators have introduced over 140 bills to restrict abortion. Sen. Drozda, quoted above, is certainly not the only member of our legislature who is all too happy to disregard the rights and needs of individual women in order to promote their own ideology. Now that they have the blessing of the Supreme Court, we will need everyone's help—your help—to actively protect the health and safety of Hoosier women.

With your support, the women of Indiana will always have access to the health care they need and the rights they deserve.

Read the reaction of Planned Parenthood of Indiana’s President and CEO, Betty Cockrum.

Alito hearings to begin January 9

January 5, 2006

The Senate judiciary committee is scheduled to begin confirmation hearings for Judge Samuel Alito on Monday, January 9, 2006. Planned Parenthood Advocates of Indiana is not alone in our opposition to President Bush's Supreme Court nominee. The Indiana Coalition for a Fair and Independent Judiciary today released a statement calling on Senators Lugar and Bayh to reject Alito's confirmation (read the PDF statement.) The coalition consists of Indiana chapters of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, NAACP, NOW, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, as well as the Indianapolis section of the National Council of Jewish Women, the Tri-State Alliance of Evansville, and numerous concerned citizens.

Urge your senators to oppose the confirmation of Judge Alito.

Bush nominates opponent of reproductive rights

October 31, 2005

Planned Parenthood Advocates of Indiana opposes President Bush's nominee to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Judge Samuel Alito, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, has a track record of limiting the rights of American women and families.

Judge Alito was the lone dissenter in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey when the case was before the Third Circuit, voting to uphold Pennsylvania's spousal notification requirement. In callous disregard of battered women who would be affected by the statute, Alito wrote separately from the majority to express his support for the law, which would have required Pennsylvania women to notify their husbands prior to obtaining an abortion. The Supreme Court later ruled the spousal notification provision unconstitutional, holding that a state cannot give a man control over his wife, stating, "Women do not lose their constitutionally protected liberty when they marry."

In Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer, the Third Circuit was asked to rule on an abortion regulation that did not contain a valid health exception for the life of the woman. Alito grudgingly applied the Supreme Court precedents of both Roe v. Wade and Stenberg v. Carhart to overturn the statute while refusing to endorse the reasoning of the Supreme Court in either case.

Judge Alito also ruled in Chittester v. Department of Community and Economic Development (heard in the Third Circuit in 2000) that provisions of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) are unconstitutional. When these same issues were addressed before the Supreme Court in the 2003 case Nevada Dept. of Human Resources v. Hibbs, Chief Justice Rehnquist himself wrote the Court's opinion concluding that the FMLA was a valid exercise of Congressional authority under the Fourteenth Amendment, remedying historic and well-documented discrimination against women.

The Supreme Court's decision to hear Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood at the end of November spotlights the urgency of the threat to reproductive freedom. In this high-stakes case, the justices are expected to rule on whether a woman's health will remain the paramount concern in laws that restrict abortion access. The ruling may have an immediate impact on women's health across the nation and will determine whether a fundamental principle established in Roe v. Wade will remain the law of the land.

Samuel Alito's record is deeply troubling. The president has nominated a conservative hardliner to replace the moderate Sandra Day O’Connor, placing the reproductive rights of all Americans in serious jeopardy. Neither Senator Bayh nor Senator Lugar sits on the judiciary committee but we urge all Planned Parenthood supporters to ask our senators to use their influence to make sure Judge Alito is not confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Urge your senators to oppose the confirmation of Judge Alito.

Read more about Judge Alito's judicial philosophy from People For the American Way.

Harriet Miers withdraws; who will be next?

October 27, 2005

This morning Harriet Miers withdrew her name from consideration as a U.S. Supreme Court justice. The statement she made to the press indicates that she was worried she might be asked by the Senate to elaborate on her legal experience working for George Bush, as president and as governor, which she is unwilling to do. This secrecy is not conducive to the business of a democracy.

Miers' withdrawal from consideration for the U.S. Supreme Court takes us back to square one: will President Bush nominate someone who is open to protecting reproductive rights, along a host of other basic human and civil rights, or will he bow to the ultraconservative wing of his party? Will the president and the nominee participate in an open, deliberative hearing process, or will we confirm an unknown, as we did with now Chief Justice Roberts?

Planned Parenthood Advocates of Indiana urges the president to stand up to extremist groups who seek to impose a narrow ideological agenda on America and pick a nominee who supports fundamental privacy and reproductive rights. "The radical right wing of the Republican Party killed the Harriet Miers nomination," said Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who had recommended Miers to the president. "They want a nominee with a proven record of supporting their skewed goals."

The Supreme Court and YOU: Round two

October 4, 2005

The new session of the Supreme Court is underway, under the leadership of the newly confirmed Chief Justice John Roberts. President Bush marked the occasion by nominating his personal and White House counsel, Harriet Miers, to fill his second Supreme Court spot. Her hearing before the judiciary committee is forthcoming; Justice Sandra Day O'Connor remains on the court until her successor is confirmed by the senate.

Planned Parenthood Advocates of Indiana reserves endorsement or condemnation of Harriet Miers until we know more about her judicial philosophy on reproductive rights. We hope that her hearing will be more educational than the last.

Neither Senator Bayh nor Senator Lugar sits on the judiciary committee, but we urge all Planned Parenthood supporters to ask our senators (click their names to email or call the numbers below) to use their influence to make sure Ms. Miers is asked, and answers, questions on reproductive rights.

Tell your senators you support only judges who will uphold legal protections for abortion and family planning.

Given the fact that judicial appointments last a lifetime, the senate has a constitutional duty to conduct a thorough, independent review of the nominee's record to determine whether she will serve the best interests of all American citizens. Essentially, the confirmation hearing is a job interview; would you hire someone without knowing whether or not she would do a good job—especially if you had no option for firing that person if she didn't?

Roberts confirmed as chief justice

September 29, 2005

Today the full membership of the Senate voted 78-22 to confirm Judge John Roberts as the next chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. View full results of the roll call vote.

Senator Lugar voted for confirmation; Senator Bayh voted against. Thank Senator Bayh for his vote.

Planned Parenthood Advocates is deeply disappointed that the senate has confirmed our new chief justice without knowing where he stands on reproductive rights. But we won’t wait long to find out: this session, he will lead the court as it hears Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood, now scheduled for arguments in December. Ayotte deals with a New Hampshire law and would decide whether abortion restrictions must include protections of women’s health and safety, as have been required since Roe v. Wade.

Planned Parenthood Advocates of Indiana stands firm: reproductive rights and protections for women's health are nonnegotiable. We remain concerned about the changing nature of the Supreme Court, and we urge President Bush to nominate someone to replace Sandra Day O'Connor who is committed to protecting the health and safety of all American women.