Skip to main content
Saturday, November 14, 2026Nov 14

Rally slated over Indiana law some say allows discrimination

A window sticker on a downtown Indianapolis business, Wednesday, March 25, 2015, shows its objection to the Religious Freedom bill passed by the Indiana legislature. Organizers of a major gamers' convention and a large church gathering say they're considering moving events from Indianapolis over a bill that critics say could legalize discrimination against gays. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy)
A window sticker on a downtown Indianapolis business, Wednesday, March 25, 2015, shows its objection to the Religious Freedom bill passed by the Indiana legislature. Organizers of a major gamers' convention and a large church gathering say they're considering moving events from Indianapolis over a bill that critics say could legalize discrimination against gays. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy)

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) – Organizers expect a large turnout Saturday at a rally against Indiana’s newest law that opponents say could sanction discrimination against gay people.

The law’s supporters, however, say discrimination claims are overblown and insist it will keep the government from compelling people to provide services they find objectionable on religious grounds.

The rally will be held Saturday afternoon in Indianapolis. It comes at a time when local officials and business groups around the state hope to stem the fallout, though criticism over the law has spread across social media – with the hashtag #boycottindiana – and to the White House.

Republican Gov. Mike Pence signed a bill Thursday prohibiting state laws that “substantially burden” a person’s ability to follow his or her religious beliefs. The definition of “person” includes religious institutions, businesses and associations. It will take effect in July.

Supporters of the law maintain courts haven’t allowed discrimination that to happen under similar laws covering the federal government and in 19 other states. Pence has said opponents mischaracterized the measure and that it was solely a limit on government restricting people’s religious liberties.