Pro-Life Lawsuit against the state of Illinois

Pro-Life Lawsuit against the State of Illinois

NO HB40
On November 30, 2017, the Thomas More Society filed a taxpayer lawsuit against State of Illinois officials in a counter attack against House Bill 40, which requires public funding of tens of thousands of elective abortions. The taxpayer lawsuit, filed in the Sangamon County Circuit Court, is brought on behalf of hundreds of thousands of Illinois taxpayers, represented by county and statewide pro-life organizations including the Illinois Federation for Right to Life and it's many affiliates.
HB 40 would force every Illinoisan to pay for free abortions for those on Medicaid and state employee health insurance. This would apply through the full nine months of pregnancy and for any reason, even when the latest scientific research has shown that the unborn child can feel pain and survive outside the womb.

The Thomas More society is a not for profit national public interest law firm dedicated to restoring respect in law for life, family, and religious freedom. The Thomas More Society is based in Chicago. Please consider helping the Thomas More Society with your financial support.

May 4, 2016

Constitution makes injunction against Daleiden invalid

David Daleiden, who heads The Center for Medical Progress, videoed Planned Parenthood and National Abortion Federation officials as they chatted about harvesting and selling organs and other tissue from aborted babies, allegedly for profit. Thomas More Society founder and attorney Tom Brejcha tells OneNewsNow the Federation sued Daleiden in federal court and obtained an injunction against him.

“It's really a gag order that says he cannot divulge to anybody outside of court the contents of his recordings at the annual conventions of the National Abortion Federation, at which these videos were taken undercover in 2014 and 2015,” Brejcha says.

The case is before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and Thomas More is arguing that the gag order conflicts with a First Amendment free-speech clause in what is called a prior restraint on speech. According to that clause, the court’s injunction against Daleiden is presumptively invalid under U.S. constitutional law.

Click here for more from OneNewsNow.