Preliminary injunctive relief is warranted here not only because Indiana's law violates the Medicaid statute, but also because injunctive relief is in the public interest. Injunctive relief will prevent further injury to Indiana's Medicaid beneficiaries. And although Indiana claims that its law serves the public interest because it prevents "taxpayer dollars from indirectly funding abortion[,] advances the State's goal of encouraging women to choose childbirth instead of abortion ... and ensure[s] that women who choose abortion have all the information necessary to make an informed and voluntary decision," Congress, in the Medicaid statute, has already made a different policy judgment: to ensure that beneficiaries who wish to receive Medicaid services—particularly family planning services—may receive those services from providers of their own choosing.

The DOJ brief echoes arguments made earlier this month by the Obama administration, which argued against Indiana's law [JURIST report] in a letter to the state. Last month, a federal judge refused to block the law [JURIST report]. Several other states have acted recently to tighten restrictions on abortions. Last month, Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy website] filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] challenging a South Dakota law requiring women to seek counseling at a pregnancy center and wait three days before obtaining an abortion. Earlier that week, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton vetoed a pair of bills [JURIST report] that restricted state funding for abortions and banned them altogether after 20 weeks. Also in May, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed a bill that requires women seeking an abortion to first get a sonogram [JURIST report]. Multiple states have acted to ban abortions after 20 weeks, when some studies suggest a fetus can begin feeling pain, including Missouri, Indiana, Alabama, Ohio, Oklahoma, Iowa, Kansas and Idaho [JURIST reports].