An Illinois appellate court on Friday ruled in favor of two pharmacists who objected to filling prescriptions for emergency contraceptives, commonly known as "the morning-after pill," because they said it violated their religious beliefs.

In litigation that spanned seven years, Luke Vander Bleek and Glenn Kosirog argued that they were entitled to exercise their right of conscience in refusing to dispense the contraceptives as required by a 2005 executive order issued by then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

The executive order required all Illinois pharmacists to dispense contraceptives, including the morning-after pill. The order later became an administrative regulation.

Emergency contraception, a high dose of regular birth control pills, can prevent pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of intercourse. In some cases, the pill may prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's uterus. Both men believe the drug can act as an abortion-causing agent.

"We are satisfied and pleased to continue to have the protection and support of the courts against the actions of the state," said Vander Bleek, owner of a pharmacy in Morrison and co-owner of two other Illinois pharmacies.

In its ruling, the 4th District Appellate Court affirmed but modified a permanent injunction granted by a lower court that had found that state law "protects the pharmacists' decisions not to dispense emergency contraceptives due to their conscience."

The decision "was a big victory for our clients," said Francis Manion, an attorney for the pharmacists and senior counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice, a public interest and religious liberties law firm.

The pharmacists had sued under the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act, which states that health professionals and organizations cannot be discriminated against, coerced or punished civilly or criminally if they decide not to offer a health or medical service because of their conscientious convictions.

"This was the latest affirmative that the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act really means what it says," Manion said. "It provides the broadest protections for the rights of conscience of health care professionals of any law in the country. It strikes an appropriate balance between the rights of people to have access to medical care and … the rights of people who object … to being coerced into violating their conscience."

The ruling, as decided, applies only to the two pharmacists and does not broadly apply to other pharmacists in the state. But Manion was optimistic about the implications.

"This is plenty, because the precedent that this will set in the state of Illinois means that the state is not going to go after a pharmacist that exercises conscientious objection when they know the court has ruled this way in this case," he said. "So we're very happy with it."

Spokeswomen for Gov. Pat Quinn and the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, both defendants in the case, said they were reviewing the decision and had no comment.

dshelton@tribune.com