This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc. (P) filed this suit to challenge Indiana statutes. The Complications Statute required physicians to report to the state 'any adverse physical or psychological condition arising from the induction or performance of an abortion.' The Statute then provided a list of twenty-six conditions that the state considered reportable conditions. The word 'including' preceded the conditions list, seemingly dictating that the list of twenty-six conditions was illustrative rather than exhaustive. The Inspection Statute requires annual inspection of abortion providers' facilities, even though other kinds of healthcare facilities are inspected less frequently. P moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of the Complications Statute. The court found that there was constitutionally intolerable overlap between 'normal' side effects of abortions and 'complications' that would trigger the reporting requirement. The court held that the Statute 'failed to inform Ps of what conduct is prohibited.' The district court found the list of conditions to be 'so broad or vague that they do not remedy the uncertainty of the general definition of 'abortion complication.'' Indiana amended the Complications Statute. In the 2019 version, the legislature eliminated the 'including' language that had previously indicated that the list was illustrative, as opposed to exhaustive. The 2019 version requires doctors to report only those conditions included on the Statute's list. The Complications Statute now requires physicians, hospitals, and abortion clinics to report abortion complications following a statutory definition. There were 24 conditions with a catch-all adverse event as defined by criteria provided in the Food and Drug Administration Safety. The Statute imposes criminal penalties for failing to comply. The parties cross-moved for summary judgment. The district court held that the Complications Statute is unconstitutionally vague and granted P's motion. The court upheld the constitutionality of the Inspection Statute. Ds appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.