Pharmacists' Victory In Illinois Caps Seven-Year Fight for Conscience Rights | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

ACLJ Profile Completion

Verified

Pro-Life Victory for Pharmacists

By Francis J. Manion1348529599000

On Friday, September 21, 2012, the Illinois Court of Appeals upheld a trial court’s injunction against the State of Illinois that protects the right of pro-life pharmacy owners to refuse to stock and sell the morning-after pill and similar drugs that interfere with the development of human life at its earliest stages. In Morr-Fitz, Inc. et al., v. Pat Quinn, Governor, et al., the court held that the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act “protects plaintiffs’ decisions not to dispense emergency contraceptives due to their conscience beliefs.”

The plaintiffs, Luke Vander Bleek and Glenn Kosirog, owners of three pharmacies between them, have been fighting a state mandate that they stock and sell the “morning-after pill” since 2005. The ACLJ is co-counsel for the pharmacies and their owners, along with Mark Rienzi, Esq. of the Becket Fund.

In April, 2005, then Governor Rod Blagojevich issued an “Emergency Rule” mandating that pharmacies fill prescriptions for drugs, including emergency contraception, “without delay.” The Emergency Rule became a final administrative rule later that year. After the Rule was finalized, Kosirog and Vander Bleek sued the governor and other state officials claiming that the regulation violated their rights under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the state’s Health Care Right of Conscience Act, one of the country’s most comprehensive set of protections for the rights of conscience in the health care arena.

After going to the Illinois Supreme Court, which ruled in 2008 that Kosirog and Vander Bleek had standing to challenge the rule, the case went back to the trial court which, in March of 2011, entered an injunction blocking enforcement of Blagojevich’s Rule. Today, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld the permanent injunction as to Kosirog and Vander Bleek, allowing them the freedom not to comply with the Rule.

In arriving at its decision, the court relied in part on a case brought by the ACLJ in 2006, Vandersand v. Wal-Mart Stores. In that case, a federal court ruled that a pharmacist who refused to dispense emergency contraception because of his religious and conscientious beliefs fell under the protection of the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act. Both these cases are part of a long line of litigation that the ACLJ has brought on behalf of pro-life health care professionals over the past decade and a half in both federal and state courts. The ACLJ seeks to defend such professionals who are on the front lines of the pro-life battle. While most of us enjoy the freedom to profess pro-life views without much fear of an immediate personal toll, when doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other health care workers take a pro-life stand, it can cost them their jobs and livelihoods.

With a permanent injunction in place, Kosirog and Vander Bleek have the legal right to run their pharmacies according to the dictates of their conscience without interference from state officials. Considering the ongoing, nationwide litigation pending against the HHS Mandate, today’s decision is a welcome one indeed. While the decision turned on the application of state only, it shows that courts will protect the rights of conscience when the legal authority is clear. We are confident that the federal courts will do the same against the HHS Mandate.

Latest in
Pro Life

Stop Forcing Pro-life Centers to Promote Abortion

By Michelle Terry1497033231285

Yesterday we filed an amicus brief (a “friend of the court” brief) before the Northern District of Illinois in a continuation of our nationwide fight on behalf of Crisis Pregnancy Centers (“CPCs”). These amicus briefs allow us to set arguments and legal analysis before a court in cases where we are...

read more

Defending Pro-Life Speech at Supreme Court

By Geoffrey Surtees1496418724497

Can the government compel pro-life pregnancy centers—facilities that offer abortion alternatives and support to women—to tell their clients that they might be able to get a free abortion, paid for by the state? While the State of California says, yes , the First Amendment says, no . As explained in...

read more

Planned Parenthood Abortions, Profits Soar

By ACLJ.org1496332297790

The numbers are shocking. Earlier this week, Planned Parenthood released its annual report for the 2015-2016 fiscal year after a six month delay. What this report devastatingly confirms is what we have been arguing all along: Planned Parenthood is in the business of abortion, its priority is not in...

read more

Pro-Life Victory at the White House

By Jay Sekulow1494964603668

Earlier this year, I wrote about the significant pro-life victory when President Trump reinstated Ronald Reagan’s Mexico City Policy to prohibit the use of U.S. taxpayer money in foreign aid to organizations that either fund or promote abortions around the world. President Trump did exactly what...

read more