Recently proposed Senate Bill 236 would let any Hoosier sue someone who manufactures, distributes, delivers, mails, prescribes or provides abortion-inducing drugs in Indiana.
Under Indiana's current near-total abortion ban, Hoosiers can legally use mail-in abortion drugs prescribed by physicians in other states. They can also travel out of state to receive an abortion procedure in person. Websites like Plan C help women, including those who live in states with abortion bans, access abortion drugs through the mail.
Mifepristone and misoprostol are commonly used medications to induce an abortion, according to Planned Parenthood.
SB 236 would redefine abortion as anything intended to “cause the death of an unborn child,” and allow any Hoosier to bring a wrongful death suit upon those who aid a pregnant person in accessing an abortion in Indiana. This includes distributing, mailing, transporting, prescribing, manufacturing or providing abortion drugs for the pregnant person.
The bill states that an act done to preserve a fetus’s life or remove an ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, or stillborn child is not an abortion.
Under SB 236, Indiana would award a minimum of $100,000 to plaintiffs who bring a successful case to court and cover all their legal fees. Defendants would be required to pay the award to the plaintiff. Hoosiers could bring a lawsuit forward up to 20 years after the legal violation occurs.
The authors of the bill, Republican Sens. Tyler Johnson and Liz Brown, did not respond to requests for comment, but both spoke about the need for the legislation in front of the senate.
“It is the violator who bears the cost, creating a powerful deterrent against illegal trafficking of these life-ending drugs,” Johnson said during a committee hearing Jan. 27.
Brown described distributing abortion pills as “the most egregious business practices that have invaded the state” during floor debate Jan. 26.
In a press release, Indiana anti-abortion nonprofit Right to Life president Mike Fichter said SB 236 “protects women from abortion-pill trafficking” and pressures to have abortions.
Sen. Shelli Yoder, a Democrat representing Bloomington, attempted to amend SB 236 in January to remove the provision allowing private individuals or groups sue others on behalf of the government. That amendment, as well as others by Democrats to limit the legislation’s restrictions on abortion pills, failed.
Yoder said the bill pits neighbors against each other and opens the door to speculative lawsuits.
She also criticized how the bill only lets private individuals sue, not “accountable” public institutions.
“We’re basically saying the state can’t sue, but your neighbors can,” Yoder said.
The bill would make healthcare providers hesitant to provide care if they are not certain whether a pregnant person is going through an abortion or a miscarriage, Yoder said, which could put pregnant people’s lives at risk. This could impact those not just those seeking an abortion, but those who require one if they run into complications during their pregnancy, she said.
Justina Licata, assistant professor of U.S. history at Indiana University East, has focused the last 15 years of her research on the history of reproductive rights, abortion and contraception.
A historian, Licata said the implications of SB 236 remind her of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which imprisoned and fined individuals who aided the escape of or provided food or shelter for people escaping slavery.
“It was a tactic of putting fear into people who were just willing to help, and it seems that that’s the tactic here,” Licata said. “They’re trying to place tremendous fear in people who are willing to help: health care practitioners, but even friends who might know something and be able to help someone get access to medication abortions.”
Giving more legal rights to the fetus, Licata said, takes certain rights away from the pregnant person. Licata said in some scenarios, the opportunity to sue and bring wrongful death lawsuits could be used by a pregnant person’s partner if they are not included in the decision to have an abortion.
Licata said these restrictions are often more harmful for people of color, people without legal residency status and those living in poverty. The more government support like welfare they get, she said, the more involved the government is in their lives. She added SB 236 would force more Hoosiers to travel for an abortion, which is unaffordable for many.
Haley Bougher, Indiana state director for Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, said she is worried more abortion providers will leave Indiana due to the bill. She’s also concerned that pregnant Hoosiers will delay receiving care and be afraid to access care or discuss it with friends and family.
She said she worries the already “abysmal” infant and maternal mortality rate in the state will worsen as pregnant people become worried about seeking abortion care. As of 2023, Indiana had the 13th-highest infant mortality rate in the country. Indiana had the United States’ third-highest maternal mortality rate in 2024.
Bougher said exempting the removal of an ectopic pregnancy, stillbirth or miscarriage from the definition of abortion is incorrect, and that these should be medically classified as abortions.
“When medical terminology doesn’t align with what they put in Indiana code, it causes confusion among providers, it causes confusion among patients and it creates a chilling effect overall,” Bougher said.
SB 236 passed the Senate Jan. 27 with a 35-10 vote, with all amendments introduced by Democrats failing. It’s now moved to the House for consideration.
