Welcome to the TMS Weekly Dispatch for June 2, 2025—with the latest news and updates from the front line, to keep you in-the-know on all things Thomas More Society. If you missed the last edition of the Dispatch, you may read it by clicking here.  

Here's a look back at the past week: 

THOMAS MORE SOCIETY AND VOICES FOR LIFE DEFEND ACCESS TO ABORTION RECORDS IN COURT: Taking the next step in holding Indiana’s abortion industry accountable, Thomas More Society attorneys have filed an opening brief on appeal against a lawsuit brought by abortionists Caitlin Bernard and Caroline Rouse. Shortly after TMS won a settlement against the Indiana Department of Health securing access to Terminated Pregnancy Reports (TPRs), the abortionists sued to conceal the records from the public.  

From the filing:  

“Hoosiers have made a commitment to protect the lives of the unborn. One of the purposes of the TPRs is to ensure that “abortions are done only” in accordance with “the law.” [Voices for Life’s] statutory right to obtain TPRs plays an important role in enforcing Indiana’s abortion laws. This Court should reverse the decision… to vindicate [Voices for Life’s] statutory right to obtain TPRs under APRA, and more fundamentally, the commitment to protect the unborn that the TPR requirement serves.”  

TMS FILES APPEAL AGAINST ILLINOIS ABORTION REFERRAL MANDATE: Last Wednesday, Thomas More Society filed its appeal challenging an April 4 district court decision in Schroeder, et al. v. Treto, Jr  that upheld an amendment to the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act (HCRCA) which would require pro-life physicians and pregnancy centers to refer for abortion. The appeal signifies an ongoing commitment to securing the First Amendment rights of pro-life ministries in Illinois, despite the legal battle lasting almost a decade.  

From the Opening Brief:

“The State here conditions the conscience rights of pro-life health care providers on their willingness to refer for and extol the purported benefits of abortion, the very procedure that violates their faith. That conditioning of conscience rights on compelled speech is unconstitutional under both the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment. And for good reason: “the people lose when the government is the one deciding which ideas should prevail.”