Cook County Circuit Court Judge Daniel A. Riley reluctantly issued an order on March 29 he believes will “cause more harm than good,” for Illinois’ young women.

In a courtroom filled mostly with members of the media, Riley lifted a temporary restraining order he imposed on the state’s Parental Notice of Abortion Act, which prohibits anyone from performing an abortion on a minor unless he or she gives the child’s parents at least 48 hours notice. Riley’s restraining order had prevented the act from becoming an enforceable law, but pending appeal, the 1995 act will be regulated and enforced by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

Riley’s issuing of the order resembled a television court room drama, complete with a twist at the end.

“The law in question is a rather unfortunate piece of legislation,” Riley said from behind the bench. “It is likely to cause more harm than good, [and the] act discriminates between minors who choose to give birth or choose to seek an abortion. It was this obvious discrimination that caused the court to issue a temporary

restraining order.”

But, Riley continued after a pause, the plaintiffs cannot prevail in their quest to deem the law unconstitutional.” He dissolved the temporary restraining order.

The judge’s ruling came in the case of The Hope Clinic for Women v. Brent Adams, the acting secretary of the Illinois

Colleen Connell, executive director of the ACLU for Illinois, took heart in the judge’s reservations about the law, even though the decision was a clear loss for her group.

“The judge clearly found the Illinois State Constitution protects a woman’s right for an abortion,” Connell said. “He expressed great concern that the [parental notification] law will cause harm. He clearly left open the opportunity for a more refined challenge to this law.”

Thomas More Society’s executive director Peter Breen brushed aside the judge’s criticism of the act and focused on the legal victory.

“Today’s decision was a pleasant surprise,” Breen said. “It’s a great day for Illinois families.”

Even though the restraining order was lifted, nothing will change for young women seeking abortion in the immediate future. The two parties agreed to suspend the enforcement of the law indefinitely while the ACLU attorneys prepared an appeal to Riley’s decision. The law will not go into effect until the appeal is denied.

Breen was unhappy about that decision and said he did not believe Riley had the authority to suspend the act pending appeal, after he deemed the law constitutional. The Thomas More Society will seek intervention from the courts to compel the government to enforce the law while the ACLU moves forward with an appeal. Breen also expressed disappointment in the Attorney General’s office in the case.

“The Attorney General was not vigorously advancing this law,” he said.

According to Breen, the people of Illinois support the notification law, which he called “mild” compared to parental notification laws in

other states.

“What we’re trying to do is prevent secret abortions,” Breen said. “Ninety percent of Illinoisans agree with that concept. Children need to go to their parents in these situations.”

But according to Connell, the issue is not whether children in safe homes should consult with their parents, but the extra burden the law puts on children in unsafe, dysfunctional homes.

“The vast majority [of young women] tell their parents,” Connell said. “When a teen says she cannot tell her parents, she knows of which she speaks.”

The act requires a minor seeking an abortion to go to court and ask for a judge’s approval to receive an abortion without notifying her parents.

“Ninety-some percent of bypass requests [in other states] are granted,” Connell said. “[Because] most young women tell their parents, and the ones who cannot have good reasons.”

Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, but both parties of the suit were buttressed by the typical forces on either side of the abortion debate. The Hope Clinic was represented by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, while the government, represented by attorneys from the Illinois Attorney General’s Office, was watched closely by the Thomas More Society Pro-Life Law Center, deemed “friends of the court” in the case.

Colleen Connell, executive director of the ACLU for Illinois, took heart in the judge’s reservations about the law, even though the decision was a clear loss for her group.

“The judge clearly found the Illinois State Constitution protects a woman’s right for an abortion,” Connell said. “He expressed great concern that the [parental notification] law will cause harm. He clearly left open the opportunity for a more refined challenge to this law.”

Thomas More Society’s executive director Peter Breen brushed aside the judge’s criticism of the act and focused on the legal victory.

“Today’s decision was a pleasant surprise,” Breen said. “It’s a great day for Illinois families.”

Even though the restraining order was lifted, nothing will change for young women seeking abortion in the immediate future. The two parties agreed to suspend the enforcement of the law indefinitely while the ACLU attorneys prepared an appeal to Riley’s decision. The law will not go into effect until the appeal is denied.

Breen was unhappy about that decision and said he did not believe Riley had the authority to suspend the act pending appeal, after he deemed the law constitutional. The Thomas More Society will seek intervention from the courts to compel the government to enforce the law while the ACLU moves forward with an appeal. Breen also expressed disappointment in the Attorney General’s office in the case.

“The Attorney General was not vigorously advancing this law,” he said.

According to Breen, the people of Illinois support the notification law, which he called “mild” compared to parental notification laws in

other states.

“What we’re trying to do is prevent secret abortions,” Breen said. “Ninety percent of Illinoisans agree with that concept. Children need to go to their parents in these situations.”

But according to Connell, the issue is not whether children in safe homes should consult with their parents, but the extra burden the law puts on children in unsafe, dysfunctional homes.

“The vast majority [of young women] tell their parents,” Connell said. “When a teen says she cannot tell her parents, she knows of which she speaks.”

The act requires a minor seeking an abortion to go to court and ask for a judge’s approval to receive an abortion without notifying her parents.

“Ninety-some percent of bypass requests [in other states] are granted,” Connell said. “[Because] most young women tell their parents, and the ones who cannot have good reasons.”

Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, but both parties of the suit were buttressed by the typical forces on either side of the abortion debate. The Hope Clinic was represented by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, while the government, represented by attorneys from the Illinois Attorney General’s Office, was watched closely by the Thomas More Society Pro-Life Law Center, deemed “friends of the court” in the case.

Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, but both parties of the suit were buttressed by the typical forces on either side of the abortion debate. The Hope Clinic was represented by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, while the government, represented by attorneys from the Illinois Attorney General’s Office, was watched closely by the Thomas More Society Pro-Life Law Center, deemed “friends of the court” in the case.

Colleen Connell, executive director of the ACLU for Illinois, took heart in the judge’s reservations about the law, even though the decision was a clear loss for her group.

“The judge clearly found the Illinois State Constitution protects a woman’s right for an abortion,” Connell said. “He expressed great concern that the [parental notification] law will cause harm. He clearly left open the opportunity for a more refined challenge to this law.”

Thomas More Society’s executive director Peter Breen brushed aside the judge’s criticism of the act and focused on the legal victory.

“Today’s decision was a pleasant surprise,” Breen said. “It’s a great day for Illinois families.”

Even though the restraining order was lifted, nothing will change for young women seeking abortion in the immediate future. The two parties agreed to suspend the enforcement of the law indefinitely while the ACLU attorneys prepared an appeal to Riley’s decision. The law will not go into effect until the appeal is denied.

Breen was unhappy about that decision and said he did not believe Riley had the authority to suspend the act pending appeal, after he deemed the law constitutional. The Thomas More Society will seek intervention from the courts to compel the government to enforce the law while the ACLU moves forward with an appeal. Breen also expressed disappointment in the Attorney General’s office in the case.

“The Attorney General was not vigorously advancing this law,” he said.

According to Breen, the people of Illinois support the notification law, which he called “mild” compared to parental notification laws in

other states.

“What we’re trying to do is prevent secret abortions,” Breen said. “Ninety percent of Illinoisans agree with that concept. Children need to go to their parents in these situations.”

But according to Connell, the issue is not whether children in safe homes should consult with their parents, but the extra burden the law puts on children in unsafe, dysfunctional homes.

“The vast majority [of young women] tell their parents,” Connell said. “When a teen says she cannot tell her parents, she knows of which she speaks.”

The act requires a minor seeking an abortion to go to court and ask for a judge’s approval to receive an abortion without notifying her parents.

“Ninety-some percent of bypass requests [in other states] are granted,” Connell said. “[Because] most young women tell their parents, and the ones who cannot have good reasons.”