Planned Parenthood Illinois Reports 54% Increase in Abortions Since Dobbs

Planned Parenthood Illinois told News Channel 20 that it has committed 54% more abortions in the year since the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

The abortion giant further said that much of the increase can be attributed to those traveling from other states. Planned Parenthood reported that women traveled from 34 other states to obtain abortions within the last year. Planned Parenthood Illinois's percentage of patients from other states increased from 7% to 25% during that time.

"We are seeing people from places as far away as Texas and Florida, where they have nothing, no access in between their home state and Illinois. Imagine having to travel hundreds of miles to get the care that you need," Brigid Leahy, of Planned Parenthood Illinois told News Channel 20.

Women facing difficult or unexpected pregnancies deserve care, but not abortion. Abortion does not care for the mother or her child. It provides death, not health. Pro-lifers in all states, including Illinois, should continue working to provide life-affirming options for women in difficult situations. Women traveling from other states should be made aware of these options so their children are protected.

Planned Parenthood also reported that the percentage of abortions it committed after 16 weeks increased from 8% to 13%.

Click here to read more.

Biden HHS Withholds $4.5 Million in Title X Funding to Oklahoma Due to Pro-Life Laws

On May 24, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced it was rescinding $4.5 million in Title X funding from the Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH). Biden's HHS told the OSDH that the state's policies are "out of compliance" due to "technical inconsistencies with HHS rules." Lawmakers and pro-life groups argue the move is a brazen attempt to punish Oklahoma for its pro-life policies.

Children are protected from abortion in Oklahoma except in cases when the mother's life is in danger. Additionally, the OSDH does not refer women for elective abortions. The latter point was highlighted by US Sen James Lankford (R) in a joint letter from Oklahoma's congressional delegation to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra.

The delegation demanded immediate reinstallation of the Title X grant, arguing that the HHS was "discriminating against OSDH for refusing to refer for abortions."

"Section 1008 of the Public Health Services Act, which authorizes Title X grant funding, explicitly prohibits funds from being‘used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning.’The same sentiment is reiterated each year as a condition of Title X appropriations, which states that Title X funds‘shall not be expended for abortions.’Nevertheless, HHS has chosen to prioritize abortion instead of prioritizing actual health care, by suspending Title X funding awarded to OSDH because of its obligation to abide by federal law and the state laws of Oklahoma. It is absurd that HHS is suspending funds previously granted to OSDH for its refusal to refer for a procedure that the underlying federal statute explicitly forbids...

Abortion is not family planning; it is family destruction. Every abortion takes an unborn child’s life. Oklahoma’s laws protect women and unborn children from the violence of abortion in the interest of promoting families, keeping Oklahomans safe, and protecting life. OSDH’s decision to follow federal and state law by protecting unborn life and seeking the welfare of individual patients and their families is a noble one. OPA’s determination of noncompliance is jeopardizing the health care of Oklahomans and has no legitimate legal foundation. Rather, HHS is interpreting laws and regulations through a political lens and ignoring clear parameters of the statutes enacted by Congress.

Oklahomans rely on OSDH’s family planning program for Title X family planning services including cancer screenings, pregnancy prevention, STI diagnostics and treatment, breast exams, and depression screenings and referrals, among a multitude of other services. OPA’s decision to suspend OSDH’s award will severely limit Oklahoman’s access to these services. In doing this, HHS is disregarding one of its own stated goals to ‘protect and strengthen equitable access to high quality and affordable health care.’

HHS cannot simply will words to mean what they do not; we are a country governed by the rule of law. When the law says ’no funds,’ Congress really means ‘no funds.’"

Click here to read more.

Iowa Supreme Court Upholds Ruling Blocking Heartbeat Law

On June 16, the Iowa Supreme Court issued a 3-3 ruling to uphold a lower court's decision to block the state's 2018 law prohibiting abortion after six weeks gestation.

The 2018 law was blocked by a district court, and its ruling was affirmed in 2019 by the Iowa Supreme Court. Their decision involved an interpretation that the Iowa Constitution created a right to abortion, but that interpretation (and Roe v. Wade) has since been overturned. Those rulings prompted Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) to ask the court to reinstate the pro-life law.

Justice Thomas Waterman wrote on behalf of the justices who voted against reinstating the law, “In our view it is legislating from the bench to take a statute that was moribund when it was enacted and has been enjoined for four years and then to put it in effect.”

He further wrote that the ruling was procedural, and Iowa could legally enforce an identical law if it was passed today.

“To say that today’s lack of action by the Iowa Supreme Court is a disappointment is an understatement.”  Gov. Reynolds said in a press release.

“Not only does it disregard Iowa voters who elected representatives willing to stand up for the rights of unborn children, but it has sided with a single judge in a single county who struck down Iowa’s legislation based on principles that now have been flat-out rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. There is no fundamental right to abortion and any law restricting it should be reviewed on a rational basis standard – a fact acknowledged today by three of the justices. Still, without an affirmative decision, there is no justice for the unborn. 

“But the fight is not over. There is no right more sacred than life, and nothing more worthy of our strongest defense than the innocent unborn. We are reviewing our options in preparation for continuing the fight.”

Click here to read more.

Texas Governor Signs Changes to "10-Day Rule"

On June 14, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed legislation to reform Texas's controversial "10-Day Rule" allowing hospital committees (often called "death panels" by outsiders) to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from patients.

Before the new changes, Texas law allowed hospitals to withdraw treatment for any reason, including a perceived low "quality of life." After providing ten days notice to family members, the hospital can remove life-sustaining treatment such as ventilators. Family members can use that time to try and find another hospital willing to provide treatment, but they must do so in a high-pressure situation with a short deadline.

The law made national news in recent years when the mother of Tinslee Lewis filed a lawsuit to protect her daughter from denial of treatment by Cook's Children's Hospital. Tinslee was born premature with a condition that caused her heart to press against her lungs. On April 7, 2022, after over 800 days of fighting the hospital in court, Tinslee was healthy enough to go home.

The new legislation takes steps to improve Texas's countdown law, but it leaves many aspects in place. It extends the countdown from ten days to 25 days, prohibits hospitals from withdrawing treatment based on a patient's "quality of life," prohibits hospitals from imposing countdowns on competent patients, and requires hospitals to perform procedures necessary to facilitate a patient transfer before imposing a countdown.

Texas Right to Life argues that patients will still be in danger until legislators eliminate the countdown law altogether, improve laws to protect disabled patients from discrimination, and guarantee impartial review by a judge.

The "25-Day Rule" is set to take effect on September 1, 2023.

Click here to read more.

American Medical Association Rejects Resolution to Protect Babies who Survive Abortion

This week in Chicago, delegates at an annual meeting of the American Medical Association voted down a resolution for the AMA to “advocate for availability of the highest standard of neonatal care to [an] aborted fetus born alive at a gestational age of viability.”

Self-described "pro-choice" Dr. Thomas Eppes introduced the resolution. "This position is not to argue the woman's right to choose ... The decision to abort is still between the patient and the physician," Eppes said. "It does not imply the woman's responsibility for the fetal life, but this resolution places the burden of care on the physician, who now has to care for two patients once the fetus is viable."

“Eppes was the only person who spoke in favor of the resolution, which was voted down 476 to 106,” MedPage reported.

"Our policy should be based on science, it should be based on fact, and it should be based on the best available evidence that honors and upholds the value of the patient-physician relationship and the nuance and complexity of medical care," responded Kavita Rora, MD. She spoke on behalf of the pro-abortion American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. "It is not a one-size-fits-all approach and should not be based on misinformation or disinformation. I strongly urge you to oppose."

Arora was the only speaker who spoke in opposition to the resolution. She did not offer an explanation as to what parts of Eppes's argument were based on "misinformation or disinformation."

Click here to read more.

Fifth Circuit Judge Frustrated at FDA's Delay in Presenting Mifepristone Research Documents

During oral arguments last week in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod expressed annoyance at the federal government's failure to produce documents regarding the FDA's approval of the abortion pill mifepristone.

The case concerns an over-20-year-old complaint from doctors arguing that President Bill Clinton's administration unlawfully fast-tracked the approval of mifepristone with a process intended to approve treatments for life-threatening illnesses. The FDA was required to respond to the complaint within 180 days, but the process has dragged on for decades. As the FDA still fails to provide relevant documents concerning its approval of mifepristone, many pro-lifers argue that it is still stonewalling this process.

Judge Elrod questioned Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sarah Harrington, legal counsel for the FDA, about when it could produce the necessary documents.

“So how soon can we get the record?” Judge asked Harrington, saying it “seems like something we would want to know about.”

“I can go back and talk to my clients. I don’t think it's going to be imminent,” Harrington responded.

Judge Elrod then asked in an annoyed tone, “Can you produce it in stages if you can’t produce it all at once? Is it a secret? I mean it’s the record, right?”

“It’s not a secret, it’s like in cold storage somewhere,” the Harrington said.

“But – I mean you’ve probably have brought it out of storage by now because you have a big national case on it,” Judge Elrod said.

“I know it’s frustrating,” Harrington said, “I don’t have anything more specific to tell you,” Harrington said.

Click here to read more.

Abortionists File Lawsuit Challenging Kansas "Woman's Right to Know" Act

A group of Kansas abortion businesses filed a lawsuit challenging Kansas's new law requiring informed consent for women considering abortions.

Kansas's "Woman's Right to Know" Act requires abortion businesses to provide the following information to abortion-minded women:

• she can change her mind and withdraw consent to the abortion

• whether the abortion business has received any disciplinary action by the state medical board

• she has a 24-hour period think before going through with the abortion

• a complete list of medical risks and potential complications

• she has a right to view her ultrasound and/or hear the child's heartbeat at no additional expense

• the child's gestational age

• Abortion pill reversal (APR) can be used to reverse the effects of the abortion pill mifepristone if taken soon enough. This method can save the child's life if the mother changes her mind after taking mifepristone.

Click here to read more.

District Judge Hears Pro-Abortion Arguments Against Abortion Pill Regulations

On June 8, US District Judge Robert S. Ballou heard arguments from abortion businesses asking him to suspend FDA regulations governing the use of the abortion pill mifepristone.

Attorneys representing abortion clinics in Kansas, Montana, and Virginia asked Ballou to force the FDA to drop Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) regulations that have placed limitations on mifepristone since it was approved 23 years ago. While the lawsuit proceeds, the abortion businesses asked the court to place an injunction against the FDA to prevent further restrictions.

This is a stark contrast to a separate lawsuit that was recently sent back to the 5th Circuit by the US Supreme Court. In Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, pro-life plaintiffs argued that the FDA unlawfully fast-tracked the approval of mifepristone through a process intended for drugs treating life-threatening illnesses. The FDA has stonewalled official complaints challenging the approval process for over 20 years.

In a third case, District Judge Thomas Rice issued an injunction preventing the FDA from "altering" the availability of mifepristone in 17 pro-abortion states.

Conflicting decisions could result in a need for the Supreme Court to make a ruling.

Click here to read more.

Sidewalk Counselor Sues to Challenge Colorado Buffer Zone Law

On June 1, Wendy Faustin filed a lawsuit against Colorado and the cities of Denver and Englewood over laws and ordinances that limit pro-life speech by creating "buffer zones" around abortion businesses.

Faustin's lawsuit argues that buffer zone laws violate her First Amendment rights. She desires to have "close, personal conversations" with women who enter and leave abortion businesses, but Colorado law and city ordinances prevent her from doing this.

Roger Byron of the First Liberty Institute represents Faustin in her lawsuit. In a statement to the press, Byron said, “The government may not target life-affirming speech simply because it disagrees with the message. That is unlawful viewpoint discrimination. It should not be a crime to lovingly and compassionately approach another person to tell them about alternatives to abortion.”

Colorado's buffer zone law prevents individuals from approaching within eight feet of patients near a healthcare facility without consent “for the purpose of passing a leaflet or handbill, to displaying a sign to, or engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling with such other person in the public way or sidewalk area.”

“Distributing leaflets discussing abortion, its risks and implications, and its alternatives is core expression protected by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment,” the complaint states. “Orally discussing abortion, its risks and implications, and its alternatives with persons entering an abortion clinic is core expression protected by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.”

The 1993 law was upheld by the US Supreme Court 23 years ago, but Faustin hopes the overturn of Roe v. Wade will also help her overturn Colorado's buffer zone law.

Click here to read more.

Flossmoor Planned Parenthood Causes Woman to Suffer Life-Threatening Hemorrhage

On May 23, a woman in her mid-thirties suffered from a life-threatening hemorrhage caused by an abortion at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Flossmoor, Illinois.

Pro-life advocates outside the clinic witnessed an ambulance arrive to take the patient to the emergency room. The Pro-Life Action League obtained a recording of the 911 call via FOIA request and provided it to Operation Rescue, an organization committed to documenting medical emergencies caused by abortion clinics.

The Planned Parenthood staffer who called 911 told the dispatcher that the hemorrhaging woman was sedated. The abortionist was attempting to mitigate the bleeding by inserting a catheter, adding sutures, and administering the drug Methergine.

Operation Rescue wrote, "These clues suggest the abortionist had lacerated or perforated the woman's uterus, and possibly other internal organs."

Available 911 records do not indicate whether the patient survived.

“We hope and pray this woman survived this horrific ordeal,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “It is all so senseless. A baby didn’t have to die that day, and this woman did not have to be maimed or possibly killed.”

Planned Parenthood in Flossmoor commits abortions up to 22 weeks gestation.

Click here to read more.

Indiana Abortionist Disciplined for Disclosing 10-Year-Old's Abortion to Media

Indiana Abortionist Caitlin Bernard
photo from Indiana University School of Medicine

Indiana abortionist Caitlin Bernard has been disciplined by the state's Medical Licensing Board for violating the privacy of a 10-year-old rape survivor.

Bernard made the news last year for talking to the Indianapolis Star about the child's abortion. She did so to make a political argument against the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Records in the legal case brought by Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita indicate Bernard went to the media before she reported the rape to state authorities.

On May 25, Indiana's Medical Licensing Board ruled that Bernard did not violate laws regarding the reporting of abuse, but she did violate the 10-year-old's privacy. Bernard has been formally reprimanded and faces a fine of $3,000. She was allowed to retain her medical license.

During the hearing, Bernard responded to a question asking why she felt it necessary to tell the media about her patient's rape and abortion. She responded,

“I think that it’s incredibly important for people to understand the real-world impacts of the laws of this country about abortion. I think it’s important for people to know what patients will have to go through because of legislation that is being passed, and a hypothetical does not make that impact.”

Rokita issued a statement praising the board's decision:

"Like we have said for a year, this case was about patient privacy and the trust between the doctor and patient that was broken. What if it was your child or your parent or your sibling who was going through a sensitive medical crisis, and the doctor, who you thought was on your side, ran to the press for political reasons? It’s not right, and the facts we presented today made that clear. We appreciate the Medical Licensing Board’s extraordinary time and consideration. My team did a great job getting the Truth out. Caitlin Bernard was found liable for violating state and federal patient privacy law on three separate counts."

Click here to read more. 

Students Sue Michigan Professor Who Exploited Students for $60K in Pro-Abortion Funding

Michigan State University (MSU) students filed a lawsuit against a professor who required students to subscribe to an organization that gives its revenue to Planned Parenthood.

Former MSU professor Amy Wisner required roughly 600 students to sign up for "The Rebellion Community," which her syllabus described as "a global social learning community." The membership cost $99.

Students later learned that Wisner personally operated the organization, and she would donate proceeds to Planned Parenthood or use them to fund “an RV road trip around the United States to co-create communities of rebels.”

When students complained, MSU fired Wisner and offered students roughly $60,000 from the College of Business to refund them for any money they paid to "The Rebellion Community." The lawsuit brought by students argues that Wisner should personally pay back the money.

Nathan Barbieri and Nolan Radomski filed the lawsuit against Wisner and two other college faculty members over the incident. Both students took a required business communication course taught by Wisner. They are being represented by Alliance Defending Freedom.

“I shouldn’t have to pay for my professor’s political activism,” Rodomski told Fox News. “This is a matter of free speech and I hope that the university changes its policy so that other students never have to pay expensive fees toward causes they don’t believe in.”

The suit also asks MSU “to instruct all faculty that their discretion to select course materials does not include authority to require students to pay membership fees to outside organizations or to financially support any private expression.”

Click here to read more.

Ohio Supreme Court Rules Pro-Abortion Ballot Initiative Can Move Forward

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled 7-0 that a proposed pro-abortion amendment to the state's constitution can move forward as a single initiative.

The proposed amendment would create constitutional rights to contraception, fertility treatment, continuing one's own pregnancy, miscarriage care, and abortion. Pro-lifers with Cincinnati Right to Life argued before Ohio's Supreme Court that the amendment violated the "single-issue" limit created by the state constitution. The pro-lifers hoped to separate it into two or more proposals appearing on the ballot separately.

If approved by Ohio voters, the amendment would create a right to abortion up until the moment of birth.

Ohio's Supreme Court wrote in its decision that the five rights listed in the proposal meet the single-issue standard "because each provision relates to the single general purpose of protecting a person's reproductive rights."

“It’s disappointing that the court did not believe it was two issues; however, we knew that we had a tall order to overcome with this case,” said Ohio Right to Life President Mike Gonidakis. “The court ruling does not change our tactics and strategies, and we know we will be successful in November.”

“...We are very confident in our approach and our tactics to get a majority vote from Ohioans who want to see our constitution safeguarded from out-of-state groups.”

Click here to read more.

Pro-Lifers Viciously Beaten Outside Baltimore Planned Parenthood

Baltimore pro-lifer Mark Crosby
photo by John Roswell

On May 26, two pro-life men praying outside a Planned Parenthood facility in Baltimore, Maryland were viciously beaten by an unidentified attacker.

Dick Schafer and Mark Crosby were seriously injured in the attack. Crosby was hospitalized with a fractured bone in his face.

Local pro-life John Roswell described the incident to LifeSiteNews. He said that the attacker first asked one of Planned Parenthood's escorts to hold his drink before lunging at Schafer “who believes his back was turned at that time to the assailant.” Roswell said that Schaeffer was slammed into the glass of the Planned Parenthood building.

“Mark, who was in the street, tried to go to Dick’s aid and was hit in the face, knocking him on the ground and the man then kicked him in the head,” Roswell added.

A client from the nearby pro-life pregnancy center, Options @328 Baltimore, screamed. A nurse from that facility quickly responded to help the injured men.

Images of Crosby after the attack show a severely swollen eye and nose. Roswell said the “plate bone in [Crosby’s] upper right cheek is completely fractured,” and he “is bleeding from some unidentified area behind his eye, and the bone eye orbit is completely shattered and will have to be replaced with metal.”

Supporters raised $41,881 in a GoFundMe campaign to help Crosby with his medical expenses.

On June 1, Baltimore police said they obtained video evidence of the attack, but no suspect had yet been identified or arrested.

Click here to read more.

Nevada Gov. Signs Law Protecting Abortion Traffickers

On May 30, Nevada joined the growing number of pro-abortion states with laws prohibiting cooperation with states investigating abortion-related crimes.

The new law signed by Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo (R) prohibits Nevada officials from cooperating with other another state if it is investigating a violation of a pro-life law in that state. The law also prohibits medical governing boards in Nevada from disciplining physicians who provide abortions.

This codifies an executive order by Lombardo's predecessor, Steve Sisolak (D). Lombardo originally said he would repeal the order if elected, but Lombardo reversed this stance later in his campaign.

Nevada's legislature is in the process of drafting legislation to enshrine the state's existing abortion rights into the state constitution. If it passes both democratically-controlled houses, it will need to be passed again in 2025 before appearing on the 2026 ballot. The governor's approval is not required.

Click here to read more.

Judge Temporarily Blocks South Carolina Heartbeat Law

South Carolina Circuit Judge Clifton Newman issued a temporary injunction blocking the enforcement of the state's new law banning the abortion of children with detectable heartbeats.

The new law prohibits abortion after a child's heartbeat is detectable, which normally occurs at six weeks. It contains exceptions for rape and incest up to 12 weeks, and any gestational age if the child is diagnosed with a fatal condition or the mother faces a medical emergency.

Newman's injunction must be reviewed by the South Carolina Supreme Court, which notably struck down a different heartbeat law in January. Since then, a pro-abortion justice retired from the court.

Gov. Henry McMaster (R) and pro-life legislators filed an emergency petition to the state supreme court requesting an expedited hearing:

“Appellants are likely to succeed on the merits,” the petition argues. “The 2023 Act resolves the issues the Court found with the 2021 Act, from removing the prior codification of the Roe trimester framework to clarifying the State’s compelling interest in the life of the unborn child to addressing the ‘informed choice’ concern.”

“Appellants will suffer irreparable harm without an injunction because the representative process is damaged every time a law adopted by the General Assembly and approved by the Governor is enjoined,” the petition further argues. “Respondents—two physicians and two facilities that perform abortions—will not: They cannot legally represent the interests of pregnant women on whom they seek to perform abortions, and they face no harm themselves from complying with state law. And a stay of the injunction pending appeal will protect the lives of countless unborn children.”

Click here to read more.

Michigan Man Who Shot Pro-Life Canvasser Sentenced to Community Service

On May 23, 75-year-old Richard Harvey was sentenced to two months in jail and 100 hours of community service for shooting Joan Jacobson, an 84-year-old pro-life advocate advocating against legislation that would enshrine a right to abortions in the state constitution.

Harvey pleaded no contest to the charges of felonious assault, careless discharge of a firearm causing injury, and reckless discharge of a firearm.

Judge Suzanne Hoseth Kreeger imposed a suspended sentence of two months. Harvey will not serve any time in jail if he abides by the conditions of his probation (which order him to have no contact with Jacobson). Harvey must also pay court costs and $347.19 in restitution.

Jacobson was canvassing door-to-door against the pro-abortion constitutional amendment, which was since passed by Michigan voters. She was arguing with Harvey's pro-abortion wife about the topic when he approached with a gun.

Harvey told the court that he believed Jacobson would hit his wife with her clipboard, so he used his gun to try and knock it out of her hands. In doing so, he shot Jacobson; narrowly missing her spine. Jacobson then drove herself to a nearby police station. From there, she was transported to the hospital.

Jacobson read a victim impact statement at Harvey's sentencing hearing.

“I’m still in disbelief that this incident happened to me,” she said. “I still wonder what was so offensive that I did or said in my brief encounter with Mrs. Harvey that made (Richard Harvey) decide I was a threat and needed to get a gun.”

“I have supported Right to Life my entire life — respecting life from the first moment of conception until natural death has fostered in me a heart that forgives and will do no harm to anyone, except of course in self-defense,” Jacobson said. “I wouldn’t harm Mrs. Harvey and I did nothing to show her I intended to harm her. I came to their home for the purpose of saving lives, not to take lives.”

Jacobson said that she forgives the Harveys, though she would appreciate an apology.

Many pro-lifers express concerns that such light sentencing will encourage further violence against pro-life advocates.

Click here to read more.

Happy Memorial Day

 

Federal Courts Rule California Can't Force Churches to Cover Abortion

Two federal courts in California ruled this month that the California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) cannot force churches to cover abortions in their employee health insurance plans. The rulings found the mandate to violate the churches' first amendment rights, and the state will have to pay $1.4 million towards the churches' attorneys fees.

Alliance Defending Freedom filed lawsuits on behalf of several churches in 2015 and 2016 after the DMHC announced a state mandate that abortion be covered in health insurance plans. Emails discovered during the lawsuit revealed that Planned Parenthood influenced the California agency's policies under a threat that they would push their own legislative solution.

“The government can’t force a church or any other religious employer to violate their faith and conscience by participating in funding abortion,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jeremiah Galus. “For years, California officials, in collaboration with Planned Parenthood, have unconstitutionally targeted faith-based organizations. This is a significant victory for the churches we represent, the conscience rights of their members, and other religious organizations that shouldn’t be ordered by the government to violate some of their deepest faith convictions.”

“In both cases, the courts ruled that the U.S. Constitution protects the churches’ freedom to operate according to their religious beliefs, which include their belief in the sanctity of unborn lives,” ADF also noted.

Click here to read more.

Michigan Gov. Signs Law to Strip Employers of Conscience Protections

On May 17, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed legislation mandating that all employer-benefit plans that cover pregnancy care must also cover elective abortions. Employers must now choose between providing abortion coverage or dropping healthcare benefits.

The legislation was passed as an amendment to the Elliot Larson Civil Right Act, which provides protection from discrimination.

“This legislation was rapidly pushed by the proabortion legislature and now Governor Whitmer to promote their abortion agenda,” stated Genevieve Marnon, Legislative Director, Right to Life of Michigan. “To include an ‘action’ in the Elliot-Larsen law is a radical departure from the intent and spirit of the ELRCA, which was designed to prevent discrimination against people for immutable characteristics such as gender, race, religion etc.”