We strongly urge legislators to oppose this resolution for two reasons:
The language of the proposed 1972 ERA, which cannot now be revised, is
virtually identical to language that the major pro-abortion groups have
used in other states (including New Mexico) for highly successful legal
attacks on laws protecting unborn children and limiting tax funding of
(2) The Illinois resolution is part of an
effort to evade the federal constitutional amendment process spelled out
in the U.S. Constitution itself.
groups – including NARAL, the ACLU, and Planned Parenthood -- have
strongly urged state courts to construe state ERAs, containing language
virtually identical to the language of the 1972 federal ERA proposal, to
invalidate laws that treat abortion differently from other “medical
procedures,” including laws restricting tax-funding of abortion and laws
requiring parental notification or consent for minors’ abortions.
for example, the case of New Mexico, which in 1973 adopted a state ERA
(“Equality of rights under law shall not be denied on account of the sex
of any person”) virtually identical to the federal language that SCR
194/HCR 109 purports to ratify. In New Mexico, this ERA language was
subsequently used as the sole basis for a successful attack the state
policy against tax-funding of abortion. In 1998, every justice on the
New Mexico Supreme Court agreed that the state ERA makes it
unconstitutional for the state Medicaid program to refuse to fund
“medically necessary” abortions (which simply means any abortion
performed by a licensed medical professional) if procedures sought by
men (e.g., prostate surgery) are funded.
The ERA would
specify that limits to abortion are by definition a form of sex
discrimination and therefore impermissible under ERA – can be used to
invalidate any federal or state restrictions even on partial-birth
abortions or third-trimester abortions (since these are sought “only by
women”); the federal and state “conscience laws,” which allow
government-supported medical facilities and personnel -- including
religiously affiliated hospitals -- to refuse to participate in
abortions; and parental notification and consent laws.
Now is the time to call your Illinois Senator. Click here to find contact information for your Illinois Senator. Urge them to vote NO on SJRCA 0004, the Equal Rights Amendment
Pro-Life Lawsuit against the state of Illinois
Pro-Life Lawsuit against the State of Illinois
|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.