118th US House Passes Pro-Life Legislation in First Week

The new Republican-led House of Representatives has passed two pro-life bills during its first week in session: The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act and a resolution condemning attacks against pro-life groups.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act was passed by a vote of 220-210. If passed into law, this would require healthcare providers to provide the same level of care to a child born during an attempted abortion as to any other child born at the same gestational age. After that, the bill would require the provider to transport the child to a hospital.

National Right to Life President Carol Tobias wrote applauded the House for passing this legislation, saying, “There is no such thing as a ‘post-birth abortion.’ This bill isn’t about interfering with a so-called right to abortion. It is about stopping infanticide.” 

The US House also passed the Resolution Condemning Violence Against Pro-life Pregnancy Care Centers, Pro-Life Groups, and Churches. As a resolution, this bill would not enact any policy. It simply condemns violent attacks by radical pro-abortion groups against pro-life facilities, groups, and churches. It calls on the Biden administration to use its power to investigate the attacks and protect these groups.

Violence and vandalism against these pro-life groups have been rampant since a draft version of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision leaked last summer, but the Biden administration has not made any arrests in connection with these violations of federal law.

Neither bill is expected to overcome the pro-abortion majority in the US Senate.

Click here to read more.

Biden DOJ Advises Postal Service that Abortion Drugs can be Mailed Lawfully in All 50 States

President Biden's Department of Justice (DOJ) wrote a slip opinion for the United States Postal Service (USPS) advising that mailing abortion drugs is not a violation of federal or state law.

Christopher Schroeder, Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel, wrote the slip opinion. He argues that the Comstock Act, which prohibits the mailing of "[e]very article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing abortion," does not apply to the abortion pills mifepristone and misoprostol "where the sender lacks the intent that the recipient of the drugs will use them unlawfully."

Schroeder writes, "there are manifold ways in which recipients in every state may use these drugs, including to produce an abortion, without violating state law. Therefore, the mere mailing of such drugs to a particular jurisdiction is an insufficient basis for concluding that the sender intends them to be used unlawfully." He later clarifies, "dosages of mifepristone and misoprostol that are used for medication abortion can be used to treat a miscarriage, and misoprostol is commonly prescribed for the prevention and treatment of gastric ulcers."

Further, Schroeder argues that it is lawful to send deliver doses explicitly provided for abortion even in states that ban abortion. He argues,

"even if a state prohibits a pregnant person from ingesting mifepristone or misoprostol for the purpose of inducing an abortion, such an individual has a constitutional right to travel to another state that has not prohibited that activity and to ingest the drugs there. Someone sending a woman these drugs is unlikely to know where she will use them, which might be in a state in which such use is lawful."

Sending abortion drugs for the purpose of causing abortion to a person who lives in a place where abortion is illegal is still fine, according to Schroeder, as long as the sender believes that the mother will travel out of state before ingesting the pills. Such an assumption seems unreasonable, and it is very possible that a sender could still face charges from a pro-life state that would argue otherwise.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erik Baptist told Live Action News,

“These longstanding federal laws prohibit the distribution of chemical abortion drugs by mail, common carrier, or express company. That means only the chemical drug manufacturer may deliver and distribute these drugs to abortionists around the country. The manufacturer cannot use the U.S. Postal Service, FedEx, UPS, or any third-party courier to distribute chemical abortion drugs to abortionists, pharmacies, or women in the United States.”

Click here to read more.

Arizona Court Upholds 15-Week Abortion Limit, Blocks 1864 Abortion Ban

An Arizona state Court of Appeals issued a ruling that Arizona's 1864 law banning all abortions is not enforceable due to exceptions carved out in more recent legislation.

“The question at the core of this appeal is whether a licensed physician who performs an elective abortion in conformity with more recent statutes in Title 36 is nevertheless subject to prosecution under §13 3603,” the Appeals Court panel wrote. “Because Title 36 permits physicians to perform elective abortions under certain circumstances, the answer is no.”

The three-judge panel unanimously ruled that although the 1864 law was never repealed, newer laws written to regulate abortion under Roe v. Wade created a set of rules that allow abortions. The court wrote that laws regarding waiting periods, parental notification, and the 15-week ban created a new legal framework allowing abortion. Essentially, they decided that these newer laws overrode the 1864 law except in cases when non-physicians might attempt to commit abortions.

Incoming pro-abortion Arizona attorney general Kris Mayes said that she will not appeal the decision, and incoming pro-abortion governor Katie Hobbs has declared her intent to get rid of the 15-week ban.

Click here to read more.

IL HB 5188 would Mandate Sex-Ed Standards Promoting Abortion as a "pregnancy option"

Pro-abortion politicians are pushing HB5188 to mandate sex education standards for public schools that would, among other things, promote abortion as a "pregnancy option."

Much like SB3799 and HB4664, HB5188 is a "shell bill." The current content as a bill is being pushed through an amendment that replaces all of the bill's original language.

The new language of HB5188 would require all public schools to adopt the "National Sex Education Standards" published by the Future of Sex Education (FoSE). Currently, Illinois law allows schools to opt out of these standards. The standards push ideologies related to sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy (including abortion). FoSE standards list specific sex-ed requirements to be met by public schools at each grade level.

The mandated standards would explicitly require students to identify abortion as a "pregnancy option" in eighth grade. It also teaches "all pregnant young people to have decision-making power in their reproductive health decisions." As early as 2nd grade, the curriculum normalizes nonmarital sexual relationships by teaching students to define cohabitation as a valid "type of family."

By first normalizing non-committed sexual relationships and then validating abortion as a morally acceptable choice, Illinois public school curriculums would teach children to accept casual sex and reject the humanity of the unborn.

Click here to read more.

South Carolina Supreme Court Rules State Constitution Implies Right to abortion

On January 5, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that a pro-life law banning the abortion of unborn children with detectable heartbeats is illegal. The court ruled that the state's right to privacy implies a right to abortion. The ruling came on the same day that Idaho's Supreme Court made the opposite ruling about its own constitution.

The South Carolina Supreme Court found that the heartbeat law "violates our state Constitution's prohibition against unreasonable invasions of privacy" because it did not allow a woman "sufficient time" to decide whether to have an abortion. 

“Our State Supreme Court has found a right in our Constitution which was never intended by the people of South Carolina. With this opinion, the Court has clearly exceeded its authority. The people have spoken through their elected representatives multiple times on this issue,” South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster tweeted. “I look forward to working with the General Assembly to correct this error.”

With the heartbeat law struck down, abortion is only banned in South Carolina after 20 weeks gestation.

Click here to read more.

Idaho Supreme Court Rules State Constitution Does Not Create Right to Abortion

On January 5th, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled 3-2 that the Idaho state constitution does not include a right to abortion.

Planned Parenthood issued a legal challenge in an attempt to block pro-life laws that were passed in 2020 and 2022. These included a "trigger" law that took effect immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last June. That trigger law bans all abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the mother's life.

Planned Parenthood argued that the right to abortion was implied by Idaho's constitution through "a fundamental right to privacy and to make familial decisions." The court disagreed in its final ruling.

“… We cannot read a fundamental right to abortion into the text of the Idaho Constitution,” she wrote. “Since Idaho attained statehood in 1890, this court has repeatedly and steadfastly interpreted the Idaho Constitution based on the plain and ordinary meaning of its text, as intended by those who framed and adopted the provision at issue.”

“That is our duty as the judicial branch: to sustain the rule of law — not to promote our personal policy preferences,” Justice Brody continued. “If we were to jettison that disciplined approach, even in the face of a uniquely emotional and politically divisive policy issue, the Idaho Constitution would no longer be the voice of the people of Idaho — it would be effectively replaced by the voice of a select few sitting on this Court.”

Click here to read more.

FDA Rule Change Allows Pharmacies to Sell Abortion Pills

On Jan 3, the FDA officially changed its regulations to allow pharmacies to sell the abortion pill mifepristone to any patient with a prescription.

Mifepristone is the first pill in the two-pill chemical abortion regimen. Mifepristone blocks the pregnancy hormone progesterone, which helps facilitate the flow of oxygen and nutrients from the mother's body to the unborn child. This causes the child to starve and suffocate to death. 24-48 hours after the mother takes mifepristone, she will take misoprostol. This drug induces labor; removing the dead child from the mother's womb.

On January 4, CVS and Walgreens told Axios that they plan to start selling abortion pills. This will turn street corners across the country into abortion businesses. Pharmacies will still be subject to state laws regulating abortion pills.

This change builds on a separate one made by the Biden administration in December 2021. At that time, the FDA administration lifted its requirement that mifepristone only be provided to patients during in-person appointments with physicians. This regulation allowed physicians the opportunity to confirm pregnancy, gestational age, and conditions such as ectopic pregnancy. This helped limit potentially deadly complications such as hemorrhaging.

After the 2021 change, abortion pills could be prescribed over the phone or through the internet. Some companies already fill abortion pill prescriptions by mail.

Click here to read more.

Pro-Abortion IL Senate Pushes Law Targeting Crisis Pregnancy Centers

photo credit: Jim Bowen / Flickr

On the evening of January 4, pro-abortion legislators in the Illinois state senate added an amendment to HB4664 that would further deregulate the abortion industry and criminalize "misinformation" by pro-life activists. This amendment completely replaces the text of the original bill.

Pro-abortion legislators are using this tactic to push legislation during the short lame-duck session. The House of Representatives is employing a similar tactic with an amendment to SB3799. We are in the process of analyzing that bill now.

As amended, HB4664 would:

• Allow non-physicians to perform surgical abortions that do not require general anesthesia. Further, physicians would no longer need to be present for such abortions.

• Give abortionists from other states, even non-physicians, "temporary permits" to commit abortions in Illinois without Illinois medical licenses

• Protect abortionists who flee to Illinois after losing their licenses in other states by breaking pro-life laws. These abortionists would be allowed to practice in Illinois, and Illinois would legally protect them from other states' efforts to extradite them for violations of pro-life laws.

• Use taxpayer funds to cover the travel, food, lodging, childcare, translation, "doula support," and abortion expenses of women who travel from out of state to have abortions in Illinois.

• Mandate that healthcare professionals with continuing education requirements take a two-hour course about "reproductive health care" including abortion.

• Empower the Attorney General to investigate sidewalk counselors, pro-life protestors, and crisis pregnancy centers (defined as "limited services pregnancy facilities in the bill) for "deception" or "omission of any material fact" whenever he "believes it to be in the public interest that an investigation be made..." Those found guilty by a court of law following any investigation could be fined up to $50,000.

Pro-life Illinoisans should call on their legislators to vote no on HB4664.

Rockford Zoning Board Rejects Challenge to Abortionist's "Home Business" Clinic

Abortionist Dennis Christensen
screenshot from "Lake of Fire" documentary clip

Abortionist Dennis Christensen, who once owned an abortion clinic in Rockford, IL that was closed for health violations, is attempting to open a new clinic as a "home business" in a Rockford neighborhood. Local residents, assisted by the Thomas More Society, challenged Christensen's attempt before the Rockford Zoning Board of Appeals. On December 20, the board ultimately rejected their challenge, and the facility opened for business on December 27.

Until the Dobbs v. Jackson decision last year, Christensen operated an abortion clinic in Wisconsin. The Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade, allowing states to create and enforce abortion laws through the democratic process. This allowed Wisconsin to enforce its 1849 law banning abortion, which prompted Christensen to return to Illinois.

Thomas More Society Vice President and Senior Counsel Peter Breen argued that the proposed business violates Rockford zoning ordinance and will do grave harm to the community.

“An abortion clinic in the middle of a residential neighborhood would be a problem under any circumstances,” explained Breen, “But it is especially egregious in this situation. This abortionist has already been run out of town previously, having had his facility shut down over ten years ago by the Illinois Department of Health, because of the risks he posed to the safety and health of area women. The residents of Rockford didn’t want him practicing in their town then and they down want him selling abortions in their neighborhood now.”

“Abortion clinics are known for bringing disturbances, loud protests and counterprotests, as well as decreases in nearby property values and significant traffic impacts,” Breen added. “Opening such a facility in a residential area not zoned for commercial use would significantly impede residents’ ability to live quiet, peaceful lives. The proposed use for this property should be independently reviewed because of its unique characteristics, traffic impacts, and effects on the surrounding community.”

Breen's prediction came true on Dec 27, the day that the clinic opened for business. Pro-life protestors stood on the sidewalk nearby holding signs when a pro-abortion woman exited her vehicle to approach the protestors and physically attack them. Authorities later arrested the woman at her home on charges of battery.

The Rockford Zoning Board of Appeals ruled that the Thomas More Society and the residents who filed complaints had no legal standing to challenge their zoning determination. The board unanimously came to this conclusion on the basis that they did not live close enough to the clinic to be affected by its presence.

The board also unanimously voted that the building could be used as an abortion business under a 40-year-old special permit allowing a home medical office there.

Christensen's "home business" at 611 Auburn St in Rockford offers abortion pills. He is working with pro-abortion activists to open a surgical abortion clinic at 4236 Maray Drive in Rockford.

Click here to read more.

US House Republicans to Introduce Pro-Life Legislation

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)

House Majority Leader-elect Steve Scalise (R-LA) announced plans to bring pro-life legislation to the House floor at the beginning of this year. While they are unlikely to pass in the Senate, these pro-life bills will show the priorities of incoming legislators.

The pro-life bills include:

No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act- a bill sponsored by Rep Chris Smith (R-NJ) that would make the Hyde Amendment permanent. The bill would prohibit federal funding of abortion and prohibit the funding of any insurance plan that includes elective abortion.

Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act - a bill sponsored by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO) requiring that healthcare professionals provide the same level of care to a child born alive during an attempted abortion as they would to any other child born at the same gestational age. It further requires that these children be transferred to a hospital after receiving this care. Providers who violate these requirements could be fined and imprisoned for up to five years.

Expressing the sense of Congress condemning the recent attacks on pro-life facilities, groups, and churches - a resolution sponsored by Rep Mike Johnson (R-LA) that would express condemnation toward the wave of violence and vandalism by radical pro-abortion activists against pro-life facilities and local churches.

Click here to read more.

Biden HHS Proposes Rule to Strip Conscience Rights from Medical Professionals

HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed new regulations that would limit medical professionals' abilities to object to immoral procedures (such as abortion or assisted suicide).

“Some doctors, nurses, and hospitals, for example, object for religious or moral reasons to providing or referring for abortions or assisted suicide, among other procedures. Respecting such objections honors liberty and human dignity. It also redounds to the benefit of the medical profession,” the proposed rule states, “[but] patients also have autonomy, rights, and moral and religious convictions. And they have health needs, sometime[s] urgent ones. Our health care systems must effectively deliver services to all who need them in order to protect patients’ health and dignity.”

Groups focused on pro-life and religious liberty issues express concerns that the new rule will require medical professionals to refer patients for controversial procedures even if they object to those procedures.

A federal district court in California recently sided with the Christian Medical Dental Association when it agreed that a law requiring medical providers to refer patients for assisted suicide likely violates the First Amendment.

Click here to read more.

FDA Changes Plan B Label to Remove Abortifacient Warning

The US Food and Drug Administration has changed the label for Plan B One-Step "emergency contraceptive" to remove a warning that the drug can function as an abortifacient.

Plan B is an over-the-counter drug that prevents pregnancy by preventing ovulation, blocking fertilization, or preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. In the third of these scenarios, an abortion occurs. A fertilized egg is a unique and innocent human being with a right to life. When Plan B prevents fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus, those humans die.

The new label reads "Plan B One-Step will not work if you are already pregnant and will not affect an existing pregnancy."

The FDA explained its reasoning for the change in a public decisional memorandum. The memorandum argues that the active drug in Plan B, levonorgestrel (LNG) “does not terminate an established pregnancy and does not affect a continuing pregnancy.” The FDA concluded, “In summary, LNG-EC is shown to act primarily by interfering with ovulation (delay or inhibition of follicle rupture and/or the midcycle LH and related hormonal changes) and not to act through direct effect on fertilization or on the endometrium to impede implantation.”

This claim is contradicted by other studies. In 2014, one year after Plan B became available over the counter, the Charlotte Lozier Institute analyzed a group of studies analyzing the abortifacient potential of emergency contraception. The institute wrote in its assessment, “All point to Plan B’s having a predominantly post-fertilization (abortifacient) MOA [mechanisms of action] when it is given during a woman’s fertile period.”

Click here to read more.

$1.7 Trillion Omnibus Earmarks $575 Million for "Family Planning/Reproductive Health"

Rep Dan Bishop (R-NC)

Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC), whose team has been combing details from the massive $1.7 trillion spending bill and sharing them on Twitter, sparked discussion when he highlighted that the bill earmarks $575 million for "family planning/reproductive health."

In a Twitter thread outlining the many earmarks crammed into the spending bill, Bishop wrote, "On a more sinister note, here's at least $575 million for 'family planning' in areas where population growth 'threatens biodiversity.' Malthusianism is a disturbing, anti-human ideology that should have ZERO place in any federal program."

The text Bishop referenced can be found on page 1,550 of the 4,155-page bill.

The Hyde Amendment applies to all spending in the omnibus. This prevents federal tax dollars from directly funding abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother's life is at risk. When this money goes to pro-abortion organizations, however, it allows them to more easily use other funds to increase abortions.

$1.7 Trillion Spending Bill includes $286 Million for Title X

The $1.7 trillion spending bill expected to be signed by President Joe Biden includes $286 million to fund "voluntary family planning projects" through Title X. Recipients of these funds will include pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood.

The bill does include the Hyde amendment, which limits how tax dollars can directly fund abortion. Specifically, the amendment prevents tax dollars from being used to fund abortions in the US except in cases of rape, incest, or when the woman's life is at risk. The funding will still help Planned Parenthood by freeing them to use other funds for pro-abortion goals.

The bill passed in the House by a vote of 225-201. It passed in the Senate by a vote of 68-29.

Pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood lamented the Hyde Amendment's inclusion and the fact that the Title X funding amount was not increased from previous years. Funding has remained at $286 million for nine years, but pro-abortion groups argued for an increase due to the Supreme Court's decision overruling Roe v. Wade.

“Congress had a clear directive and they failed to deliver,” Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson told Politico. “At a time when Roe v. Wade has been overturned and health care access is under increasing threat, this bill fails to meet the moment.”

Click here to read more.

6th Circuit Blocks Louisville, Kentucky Buffer Zone Ordinance

On Dec 21, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a Louisville, Kentucky ordinance banning sidewalk counseling outside EMW Women's Surgical Center (the only abortion clinic in the city) "likely violate[s] the first amendment" and placed an injunction blocking its enforcement.

The buffer zone ordinance has been in place for over a year.

In the court's opinion, Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote,

“Sisters for Life, several individuals, and another pro-life organization wish to offer leaflets and compassionate, if sometimes unwelcome, speech to women entering abortion clinics in Louisville, Kentucky….But Louisville-Jefferson County limited their speaking and pamphleteering in buffer zones near the entrance of each clinic. Because these limits likely violate the First Amendment… we preliminarily enjoin them.”

Kentucky Right to Life Executive Director Addia Wuchner responded joyfully in a press release:

"Judge Jeffrey Sutton and the Court recognized the critical elements of the practice of ‘sidewalk counseling’— the quiet, compassionate, non-threatening, one-on-one conversations where dedicated sidewalk counselors reach out to convince EMW’s patients that there are life-saving alternatives to abortion. The practice of sidewalk counseling has always been to come alongside and accompany the woman in whatever way she may need."

The case now returns to the Western District of Kentucky, but the ordinance will be rendered unenforceable while the case proceeds.

Planned Parenthood Drops Challenges to Five NC Pro-Life Laws

On Dec 22, a coalition of pro-abortion groups led by Planned Parenthood South Atlanta dropped their legal challenges against five North Carolina pro-life laws.

The five laws that were challenged by pro-abortion groups include:

• prohibition on telemedicine abortions
• 72-hour informed-consent period
• facility safety-code obligations
• requirement that facilities provide patients with informed-consent information
• regulation stating abortions must performed by licensed physician

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represented North Carolina's Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate and defended the legislation in court.

“Every woman deserves to have all the information she needs to make the healthiest choice for everyone involved in an unexpected pregnancy,” said ADF Senior Counsel Denise Harle, director of the ADF Center for Life. “Tragically, many women turn to abortion as a last resort, unaware of the resources available to them or the harms of abortion. No one benefits more from this situation than abortionists and their facilities. We’re pleased to have favorably closed this case on behalf of the legislators we represent, and to see these life-saving state laws that empower women remain in effect.”

Click here to read more.

Illinois House Speaker Says Lawmakers will Likely Consider Abortion Rights Constitutional Amendment

Rep. Emanuel "Chris" Welch (D-7)

Illinois House Speaker Emanuel "Chris" Welch (D-7) indicated to several news outlets that his party is likely to consider a constitutional amendment creating a right to abortion in Illinois.

When asked by the State Journal-Register about the possibility of a constitutional amendment, Welch responded, “That's certainly one of the questions that's out there, and it’s a strong possibility. But again, I don't want to get ahead of the working group or the recommendations they formally present. I'm certain that's one of the things that's on the table.”

Even though Illinois has maintained a staunchly pro-abortion supermajority for many election cycles, Welch told KSDK TV "Right now, we're a single Legislature or a single Supreme Court away from losing [abortion] rights."

Illinois is already one of the most pro-abortion states in the country, but a constitutional amendment could prevent future pro-life advocates from protecting the rights of the unborn. To protect the unborn, Illinoisans would need to amend the constitution again to remove the pro-abortion language. This is more difficult than simply passing a law.

A constitutional amendment would require a 3/5 vote from lawmakers in the Illinois General Assembly before going to the ballot for the general election. The amendment is considered adopted if it is approved by 3/5 of those voting on the amendment or a simple majority of all ballots cast.

Click here to read more.

Merry Christmas!

 

Canadian Government Funds Assisted Suicide Activity Book for Children

The Canadian health department (Health Canada) has funded an activity book for children aged 6-12 designed to normalize the practice of assisted suicide.

The booklet is titled "Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) Activity Book". The cover reads, “Welcome! These activities will help you think about Medical Assistance in Dying by someone in your life.” The book seeks to convince children that a loved one who has been killed by assisted suicide has not been wronged. The book describes MAiD as follows:

"The word ‘medical’ means the science of medicine, and ‘assistance’ means help. So MAiD means that medicine is used to help someone with their death. A doctor or nurse practitioner (a nurse with special training) uses medicines to stop the person’s body from working. When their body stops working, the person dies. This is done in a way that does not hurt the person. The medicines help them feel comfortable and peaceful. A person has to ask for MAiD and then go through a bunch of steps before it can happen. The steps are described below in this book."

The activity book can be viewed here.

Disturbingly, the book even justifies assisted suicide in cases where the person is not diagnosed with a terminal illness. Page five of the book linked above reads, "Other people might ask for MAiD if their illness or disability will not cause their body to die, but it causes too much pain or suffering for them to keep living with it, and there is no way to make the illness or disability get better or go away."

The book goes on to tell children that MAiD is a "personal choice" and that friends and family should not try and stop. In reality, it is an act by a medical professional to intentionally end the life of a vulnerable and suffering individual. Two recent stories exemplify this:

A Canadian veteran was offered assisted suicide by Canada's veterans department when she requested financial assistance for a stairlift.

A disabled Canadian man was approved for assisted suicide after he was no longer able to afford housing. He reconsidered his decision after the story went viral and generous individuals raised money for him.

66 Congress Members Demand Defense Secretary Rescind Policy Funding Abortion Travel

On Dec 15, 66 Members of Congress wrote a bicameral letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin demanding that he "immediately" revoke the new Defense Department policy funding travel for abortions.

Rep Chris Smith (R-NJ), Rep Vicky Hartzler (R-MO), Sen Steve Daines(R-MT), and Sen James Lankford (R-OK) led the letter to Secretary Austin. They were responding to a recent memorandum announcing that the Pentagon would pay the travel costs of service members and their dependents should they travel out of state to have abortions.

This is one of the latest developments in the Biden administration's ongoing attempts to undermine the US Supreme Court's Dobbs decision returning the issue of abortion to state legislatures and the democratic process.

“We write in strong opposition to the memorandum,” the lawmakers wrote, which “violates decades-old federal law prohibiting the Department of Defense (DOD) from funding elective abortion (which includes facilitating such abortions), and we urge you to immediately rescind it.”

“Congress has clearly and consistently acted to prevent the U.S. military from funding elective abortion procedures and services necessitated by those procedures.

“While the memorandum claims that this policy will be implemented consistent with federal law, funding travel and transportation to obtain non-covered, elective abortions through the DOD would, in and of itself violate federal law. It also contradicts DOD’s past recognition, interpretation, and implementation of this law.”

Click here to read more.