๐ฐ Religious Freedom Arguments Underpin Wave of Challenges to Abortion Bans ๐ฉ
โฌ๏ธ Pidgin โฌ๏ธ โฌ๏ธ Black American Slang โฌ๏ธ English
In lawsuits wey dey challenge state abortion bans, lawyers for abortion rights plaintiffs dey use relijon liberty arguments wey di Christian right don dey use for decades. For years, conservative Christians don dey use di principle of relijon freedom win legal battles on top tins like contraceptive insurance mandates and pandemic restrictions. Now, pipo wey support abortion rights dey employ dat argument challenge one of di right’s most prized accomplishments: state bans on top abortion. ๐ช๐ซ๐ถ
In di year since Roe v. Wade been overturned, clergy and members of different religions, including Christian and Jewish denominations, don file about 15 lawsuits for eight states, dey talk say abortion bans and restrictions dey infringe on dia faith. Many of those wey dey sue dey tok say according to dia relijon belief, abortion suppose dey allowed for at least some circumstances wey di bans dey prohibit. Dem dey tok say di bans dey violate relijon freedom guarantees and di separation of church and state. Di suits, some dey seek exemption and oda dey seek to overturn di bans, often dey invoke state relijon freedom restoration acts wey conservatives don use for some social issues. ๐๐๐พ๐
Di lawsuits dey show say “relijon liberty no dey work one direction,” Elizabeth Sepper, one law professor for University of Texas for Austin talk. Aaron Kemper, one lawyer wey dey represent three Jewish women wey dey sue to overturn Kentucky’s abortion ban, talk say e study and imitate federal and state relijon liberty cases wey conservatives win. “We be like, e dey work for dem, so we think say we suppose use sections from those cases,” e tok. ๐จโโ๏ธ๐
Even though many of di lawsuits never get court rulings yet, there dey signs say di arguments fit get legal traction. For Indiana, one judge issue preliminary injunction wey block di state’s abortion ban, talk say e violate di state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act wey dem adopt for 2015 under Gov. Mike Pence, one strong opponent of abortion wey dey run for president now. Oklahoma and West Virginia don recently modify dia relijon freedom restoration acts to explicitly prevent challenges to abortion bans under di acts. ๐๐ท
Some belief systems, like di United Church of Christ, dey support women make dia own decision for pregnancy. Some, like di Episcopal Church and many branches of Judaism, get traditions wey support abortion for certain cases, especially if di pregnancy fit threaten di woman’s physical or mental health or if di pikin get serious abnormalities. Some relijons no define life as starting from conception. โช๐คฐ๐ฅ
Di Indiana case bin be filed by Hoosier Jews for Choice, three Jewish women and one woman wey get independent spiritual beliefs. Judge Heather Welch of Marion County Superior Court don certify am as class-action lawsuit on behalf of “all persons for Indiana wey dia relijon belief direct dem to obtain abortions for situations wey di ban no gree.” “Di court don conclude say di plaintiffs’ relijus exercise dey face substantial burden, and say dem dey suffer irreversible harm,” Judge Welch write for blocking di ban. Di state don appeal, argue say “‘abortion access’ no be relijus exercise.” Indiana’s attorney general write say “plaintiffs no identify any principle wey make abortion become relijus act pass countless oda actions wey dem believe say dey affect dia well-being.” ๐ผ๐ฐ Religious Freedom Arguments Underpin Wave of Challenges to Abortion Bans ๐ฉ
In lawsuits wey dey challenge state abortion bans, lawyers for abortion rights plaintiffs dey use relijon liberty arguments wey di Christian right don dey use for decades. For years, conservative Christians don dey use di principle of relijon freedom win legal battles on top tins like contraceptive insurance mandates and pandemic restrictions. Now, pipo wey support abortion rights dey employ dat argument challenge one of di right’s most prized accomplishments: state bans on top abortion. ๐ช๐ซ๐ถ
In di year since Roe v. Wade been overturned, clergy and members of different religions, including Christian and Jewish denominations, don file about 15 lawsuits for eight states, dey talk say abortion bans and restrictions dey infringe on dia faith. Many of those wey dey sue dey tok say according to dia relijon belief, abortion suppose dey allowed for at least some circumstances wey di bans dey prohibit. Dem dey tok say di bans dey violate relijon freedom guarantees and di separation of church and state. Di suits, some dey seek exemption and oda dey seek to overturn di bans, often dey invoke state relijon freedom restoration acts wey conservatives don use for some social issues. ๐๐๐พ๐
Di lawsuits dey show say “relijon liberty no dey work one direction,” Elizabeth Sepper, one law professor for University of Texas for Austin talk. Aaron Kemper, one lawyer wey dey represent three Jewish women wey dey sue to overturn Kentucky’s abortion ban, talk say e study and imitate federal and state relijon liberty cases wey conservatives win. “We be like, e dey work for dem, so we think say we suppose use sections from those cases,” e tok. ๐จโโ๏ธ๐
Even though many of di lawsuits never get court rulings yet, there dey signs say di arguments fit get legal traction. For Indiana, one judge issue preliminary injunction wey block di state’s abortion ban, talk say e violate di state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act wey dem adopt for 2015 under Gov. Mike Pence, one strong opponent of abortion wey dey run for president now. Oklahoma and West Virginia don recently modify dia relijon freedom restoration acts to explicitly prevent challenges to abortion bans under di acts. ๐๐ท
Some belief systems, like di United Church of Christ, dey support women make dia own decision for pregnancy. Some, like di Episcopal Church and many branches of Judaism, get traditions wey support abortion for certain cases, especially if di pregnancy fit threaten di woman’s physical or mental health or if di pikin get serious abnormalities. Some relijons no define life as starting from conception. โช๐คฐ๐ฅ
Di Indiana case bin be filed by Hoosier Jews for Choice, three Jewish women and one woman wey get independent spiritual beliefs. Judge Heather Welch of Marion County Superior Court don certify am as class-action lawsuit on behalf of “all persons for Indiana wey dia relijon belief direct dem to obtain abortions for situations wey di ban no gree.” “Di court don conclude say di plaintiffs’ relijus exercise dey face substantial burden, and say dem dey suffer irreversible harm,” Judge Welch write for blocking di ban. Di state don appeal, argue say “‘abortion access’ no be relijus exercise.” Indiana’s attorney general write say “plaintiffs no identify any principle wey make abortion become relijus act pass countless oda actions wey dem believe say dey affect dia well-being.” ๐ผ
NOW IN BLACK AMERICAN SLANG
๐ฐ Religious Freedom Arguments are the Foundation of Challenges to Abortion Bans ๐ฉ
When it comes to lawsuits going against state abortion bans, lawyers representing abortion rights are flipping the script by using religious liberty arguments that the Christian right has been pushing for ages. For years, conservative Christians have been flexing their religious freedom muscles to win legal battles on issues like contraception coverage and pandemic restrictions. But now, supporters of abortion rights are using that same argument to challenge one of the right’s most treasured victories: state bans on abortion. ๐ช๐ซ๐ถ
Since the day Roe v. Wade got overturned, clergy and believers of different religions, including Christians and Jews, have filed about 15 lawsuits across eight states, claiming that these abortion bans and restrictions trample on their faith.
Those taking legal action argue that based on their religious beliefs, abortion should be allowed in certain circumstances, which these bans shut down. They contend that these bans not only violate guarantees of religious liberty but also breach the separation of church and state. These lawsuits, some seeking exceptions and others aiming to overturn the bans altogether, often bring up state religious freedom restoration acts that conservatives have used in previous battles over social issues.
According to Elizabeth Sepper, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, these lawsuits prove that “religious liberty doesn’t work in just one direction.”
Aaron Kemper, a lawyer representing three Jewish women who are fighting to overturn Kentucky’s abortion ban, shared that they took inspiration from religious liberty cases won by conservatives at the federal and state levels.
“We peeped their moves and figured, hey, it works for them, so why not borrow some sections from those cases?” he said.
While most of these lawsuits are still awaiting court decisions, there are signs that these arguments might have some legal weight. In Indiana, a judge issued a preliminary injunction that blocked the state’s abortion ban, stating that it violated the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act enacted in 2015 under then-Governor Mike Pence, a staunch abortion opponent who’s now running for president.
Realizing the potential threat, Oklahoma and West Virginia recently amended their religious freedom restoration acts to explicitly ward off challenges to abortion bans using those acts.
Certain belief systems, like the United Church of Christ, back a woman’s right to make her own choices during pregnancy. Others, such as the Episcopal Church and various branches of Judaism, have traditions that support abortion in specific cases, especially when the mother’s physical or mental health is at risk or when there are severe fetal abnormalities. Some faiths don’t view life as beginning at conception.
The Indiana case was filed by Hoosier Jews for Choice, consisting of three Jewish women and one woman with independent spiritual beliefs. Judge Heather Welch of Marion County Superior Court classified it as a class-action lawsuit representing “all persons in Indiana whose religious beliefs compel them to seek abortions in situations prohibited by” the ban.
“The court has determined that the plaintiffs’ religious practice is facing significant burdens and that they’re experiencing irreversible harm,” Judge Welch wrote when blocking the ban.
The state has appealed, arguing that “‘abortion access’ doesn’t qualify as religious practice.” Just like other states fighting these lawsuits, Indiana claims to have a “compelling interest” in banning abortions.
“Plaintiffs haven’t presented any principle that makes abortion a religious act any more than countless other actions that they believe affect their well-being,” wrote Indiana’s attorney general. He added, “There are other acceptable methods for plaintiffs to achieve their desired outcomes when it comes to childbearing, such as sexual abstinence, contraceptives, IUDs, and natural family planning, just to name a few.”
Decades ago, some anti-abortion groups warned that religious freedom arguments might end up bolstering abortion rights.
NOW IN ENGLISH
๐ฐ Religious Freedom Arguments Underpin Wave of Challenges to Abortion Bans ๐ฉ
In lawsuits challenging state abortion bans, lawyers for abortion rights plaintiffs are employing religious liberty arguments the Christian right has used for decades. For years, conservative Christians have used the principle of religious freedom to prevail in legal battles on issues like contraceptive insurance mandates and pandemic restrictions. Now, abortion rights supporters are employing that argument to challenge one of the right’s most prized accomplishments: state bans on abortion. ๐ช๐ซ๐ถ
In the year since Roe v. Wade was overturned, clergy and members of various religions, including Christian and Jewish denominations, have filed about 15 lawsuits in eight states, saying abortion bans and restrictions infringe on their faiths.
Many of those suing say that according to their religious beliefs, abortion should be allowed in at least some circumstances that the bans prohibit, and that the bans violate religious liberty guarantees and the separation of church and state. The suits, some seeking exemptions and others seeking to overturn the bans, often invoke state religious freedom restoration acts enacted and used by conservatives in some battles over social issues.
The lawsuits show “religious liberty doesn’t operate in one direction,” said Elizabeth Sepper, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin.
Aaron Kemper, a lawyer representing three Jewish women who are suing to overturn Kentucky’s abortion ban, said he studied and emulated federal and state religious liberty cases that conservatives won.
“We were like, it works for them, so we thought we should use sections from those cases,” he said.
Though most lawsuits have not yet yielded court rulings, there are signs the arguments may have some legal traction. In Indiana, a judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state’s abortion ban, saying it violated the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act adopted in 2015 under then-Gov. Mike Pence, an ardent abortion opponent who is now running for president.
Recognizing a potential threat, Oklahoma and West Virginia recently amended their religious freedom restoration acts to explicitly prevent challenges to abortion bans under the acts.
Some belief systems, including the United Church of Christ’s, support women making their own decisions in pregnancy. Some, including the Episcopal Church and many branches of Judaism, have traditions that abortion should be supported in certain cases, especially where pregnancies threaten women’s physical or mental health or involve serious fetal abnormalities. Some faiths do not define life as beginning with conception.
The Indiana case was filed by Hoosier Jews for Choice, three Jewish women and a woman with independent spiritual beliefs. Judge Heather Welch of Marion County Superior Court has certified it as a class-action lawsuit on behalf of “all persons in Indiana whose religious beliefs direct them to obtain abortions in situations prohibited by” the ban.
“The court has concluded that the plaintiffs’ religious exercise is being substantially burdened, that they are suffering irreparable harm,” Judge Welch wrote in blocking the ban.
The state has appealed, arguing that “‘abortion access’ is not religious exercise.” Like other states fighting such lawsuits, Indiana said it has a “compelling interest” to prohibit abortions.
“Plaintiffs identify no principle that makes abortion a religious act any more than countless other actions that they believe to affect their well-being,” Indiana’s attorney general wrote, adding, “Other acceptable means for plaintiffs to achieve such ends in the context of childbearing include sexual abstinence, contraceptives, IUDs, and natural family planning, just to name a few.”
Decades ago, some anti-abortion groups warned that religious freedom arguments might be used to bolster abortion rights. When Congress considered what became the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the National Right to Life Committee and the U.S. Catholic Conference raised that concern.