But chalk up another one for the ACLU. That final hurdle the Illinois parental notification law had to get by yesterday proved to be bigger than another routine holdup.

It was a brick wall, and it stopped passage of the law. Astonishing.

A state judge blocked enforcement of a parental
notification law on abortion just hours after a state board approved
letting it go into effect. The law would allow parents the right to
know when their teenager daughter is considering having an abortion and
give them 48 hours to help her find alternatives.

Parents in Illinois have waited for 15 years for a law to go into
effect and, earlier Wednesday, a vote from the Illinois’ Medical
Disciplinary Board made it appear that would happen.

The Illinois legislature approved the law in the 1990s, but it has
been held up in court waiting for the Illinois Supreme Court to issue
the rules guiding the law’s implementation.

After the court did its job, state officials blocked enforcement of
the law with a 90-day grace period for abortion centers to became aware
of it — even though similar laws have been on the books in other states
for decades.

These are just bogus ploys. And yet, they work.

The board met in Chicago on Wednesday and decided not to
extend the grace period further that the Illinois Department of
Financial and Professional Regulation put in place.

However, Wednesday afternoon, Judge Dan Riley ruled in favor of the
pro-abortion American Civil Liberties Union, which convinced him to
issue an injunction with its claims that it violates the state
constitution — even though abortion was not legal when the constitution
was put in place.

Details. The judge wasn’t interested in facts.

Like the conflict of interest involved at the level of state regulation.

Critics of the delay note that the new secretary of the
regulation department, Brent E. Adams, is a member of Personal PAC,
which focuses on electing abortion-rights candidates in Illinois.

“This is the proverbial fox guarding the henhouse,” said Peter
Breen, executive director and legal counsel of the Thomas More Society…

…the legal group representing pro-life interests. Which found out
today that the judge is looking out for the fox and giving him cover.

As the Tribune said in that editorial, enough already.