Ohio Supreme Court Accepts "Unborn Child" Wording for Abortion Rights Ballot Item

On September 19, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled 3-2 in favor of the Ohio Ballot Board's language for a ballot item that would enshrine a right to abortion in the Ohio constitution.

The proposed amendment would legalize abortion at all stages of pregnancy as long as an abortionist deems it necessary to protect the mother's health. This can include mental health, and abortionists would be able to make the judgment themselves.

A coalition of pro-abortion groups sued the Ohio Ballot Board over the word choice used in the ballot item set to appear this fall. The language chosen by the ballot board replaced the word "fetus" with "unborn child."

The Ohio Supreme Court rejected the argument by pro-abortion groups that the ballot board's language "introduces an ethical judgment."

Mary Cianciolo, a spokesperson for the Ohio Secretary of State's Office, told NBC News, “By rejecting special interest attempts to substitute their own carefully crafted and poll-tested language for that of the ballot board, they have ensured Ohio voters will have a full and accurate understanding of the proposed measure when they go to cast their ballots.”

Click here to read more.

Indiana Attorney General Files Suit Against Hospital System Employing Abortionist Caitlin Bernard

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita (R)

On September 15, Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita filed suit against the state's largest hospital system, Indiana University Health (IUH). The lawsuit alleges that the hospital system was complicit in abortionist Caitlin Bernard's violation of privacy laws when she informed the press about a 10-year-old rape victim's abortion.

Indiana's Medical Licensing Board reprimanded Bernard and fined her $3000. IUH, on the other hand, claimed that Bernard did not violate any laws with her actions.

Rokita's lawsuit states,

"The 10-year-old’s treatment was a very private and sensitive matter, as was the abuse she suffered that resulted in her pregnancy. Neither the 10-year-old nor her mother gave the doctor authorization to speak to the media about their case.

Rather than protecting the patient, the hospital chose to protect the doctor, and itself."

The lawsuit alleges IUH violated the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and an Indiana patient privacy law.

Rokita also argues that IUH is not treating employees fairly, suggesting that other employees were fired after lesser offenses.

"By publicly contradicting the Medical Licensing Board by contending [Bernard’s] actions were 'in compliance with privacy laws,' and through its inconsistent application of its privacy policies and sanctions among its 36,000 member workforce, IUH has created confusion regarding what conduct is permitted under HIPAA privacy laws and the Indiana Patient Confidentiality rule. The inconsistencies and confusion threaten the privacy of its Indiana patients."

Click here to read more.

Scientists Seeking Approval for Artificial Wombs

photo credit: Andrew Nyr
CC-BY-SA-4.0

Researchers at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) are requesting permission from the FDA to begin human testing for artificial womb technology. At this time, the researchers hope to use these artificial wombs to increase the survival rates of micro-preemies.

So far, CHOP researchers have successfully used artificial womb devices to keep premature lambs alive.

FDA advisors are set to meet and discuss the request next week. “This is definitely an exciting step and it’s been a long time coming,” Kelly Werner, a bioethicist and neonatologist at Columbia University Medical Center, told Nature. “Clinicians who work with premature babies will be closely following this meeting.”

If artificial wombs become readily available to preserve the lives of unborn children prior to viability, then the abortion debate will change dramatically. Pro-abortion activists would no longer be able to take the stance that abortion is necessary to preserve a mother's "bodily autonomy." Artificial wombs could take the burden of childbearing away from women with unplanned pregnancies without ending the lives of innocent children.

Some pro-abortion activists still argue for abortion rights in an era of artificial wombs. In an op-ed for Vox, I. Glenn Cohen wrote that women should have the option because they might not want to be a genetic parent.

“This would effectively preserve her right not to be a gestational parent — as she can stop gestating by transfer to the artificial womb — but not her right not to be a genetic parent. That’s because a child would come into being with her genetic code that she does not want to exist,” he said, adding, “Confronted with the argument that transfer to an artificial womb could be made mandatory, a different strategy might be to stand up and defend abortion as a right not to be a genetic parent — full stop. The asserted right, in other words, would extend further than the right not to be a gestational parent and include a right to terminate the fetus.”

In this argument, a mother's feelings toward her child are more important than the child's well-being; even to the point that a mother has the right to order her child's death. It is an extreme position, even for pro-abortion activists.

Artificial wombs may create other ethical concerns, but it is worth discussing how emerging technology will affect the abortion debate.

Click here to read more.

Three More Pro-Lifers Jailed After Second DC FACE Act Trial

On September 15, three more pro-life activists were found guilty of "conspiracy against rights" and violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act during the second trial for a pro-life rescue in October 2020. Like the first group of pro-lifers sentenced at the end of August, these defendants were immediately jailed for committing a "crime of violence."

74-year-old Joan Bell, 73-year-old Jean Marshall, and 41-year-old Jonathan Darnel could each face 11 years in prison and $350,000 in fines. All eight activists, including those found guilty in the first trial, await sentencing.

A press release from Biden's Department of Justice says that the defendants,

"engaged in a conspiracy to create a blockade at the reproductive health care clinic to prevent the clinic from providing, and patients from receiving, reproductive health services. As part of the conspiracy, Marshall and Bell traveled to the Washington, D.C. area to meet with Darnel and participate in a clinic blockade that was directed by another co-conspirator and broadcast on Facebook.

According to evidence presented at trial, Marshall and Bell were among a group that forcefully entered the clinic and blockaded two clinic doors using their bodies, furniture, chains and ropes. Once the blockade was established, Darnel – who remained outside the clinic – live-streamed their activities on social media. The evidence also showed that the defendants violated the FACE Act by using a physical obstruction to injure, intimidate and interfere with the clinic’s employees and a patient because they were providing or obtaining reproductive health services."

Congressmen Accuse NAF Lawyer of Perjuring Herself in Testimony

Talcott Camp, the chief legal and strategy officer for the National Abortion Federation (NAF), has been asked by members of Congress to correct her misleading testimony before Congress or face legal consequences.

Congressmen Chip Roy (R-TX) and Mike Johnson (R-LA) suggested that Camp's statements regarding the authenticity of undercover recordings featuring her “violated the law by providing misleading information to Congress.”

Camp was caught on video by undercover journalists with the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) discussing how body parts from aborted children are harvested for medical research. Roy asked Camp to explain her remarks. He cited them verbatim before Congress in May of 2023.

“I’m like—oh my God! I get it,” Camp said in the recording, referring to crushing the skulls of unborn babies. “When the skull is broken, that’s really sharp! I get it! I understand why people are talking about getting that skull out, that calvarium.”

Camp responded to Roy's question by telling Congress it would be "impossible" for her to know whether she made the recorded statement. She told Congress that the videos were heavily edited.

Documents filed by the NAF in 2017 during court proceedings with the CMP certified the videos as authentic. Upon finding these documents, Roy and Johnson called on Camp to correct the record.

“As part of your testimony, you questioned the authenticity of statements recorded on video that you had previously made and that the National Abortion Federation had certified as authentic in court proceedings,” the congressmen said.

“Naturally, these conflicting facts and statements raise serious questions regarding the accuracy of your testimony,” they continued. “Providing false and misleading information to Congress violates the law. It is our goal to give you the opportunity to correct the record and ensure that the American people and their congressional representatives have a complete understanding of the truth.”

The Congressmen asked Camp to provide a response before Sept. 18 to amend her testimony.

CMP undercover journalist David Daleiden provided a statement to the Daily Signal:

“The National Abortion Federation will go as far as perjuring themselves before Congress to deny what the tapes clearly show,” he said, namely “Big Abortion’s candid admissions that their business is based around killing babies and selling their body parts.”

“As one of the undercover reporters involved in the taping, I can confirm the recording’s authenticity even if Talcott Camp and NAF continue to perjure themselves about it,” Daleiden added. “I will never forget the look on her face at a NAF commercial tradeshow when she gleefully described feeling the broken pieces of an aborted baby’s skull.”

Click here to read more.

VP Kamal Harris Dodges Questions on Late-Term Abortion Cut-off

In a Face the Nation interview released on September 10, Vice President Kamala Harris refused to say whether she would put an upper limit on the gestational age for legal abortions.

“What is it that you believe? I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?” Margaret Brennan asked Harris.

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” answered Harris.

Brennan correctly pointed out that Harris's answer was unclear. Roe created a variety of legal protections for abortion, allowing it on-demand throughout pregnancy until roughly 24 weeks gestation. Further, it legalized abortions committed after that point for vaguely defined health reasons. Many voters don't understand the extent to which Roe v. Wade enabled abortion. She asked Harris to provide a "clear" and "precise" explanation for her opinion on the issue.

“Let me be clear,” said Harris. “From day one, the president has been clear, I have been clear. We need to put back the protections that are in Roe v. Wade into law since the Supreme Court took it. Congress has the power and ability to pass legislation to put those protections back in law and Joe Biden will sign that bill. That is what we want.”

Brennan was persistent in her questioning, even providing a potential out.

“Out in New Mexico, for example,” said Brennan, “the governor there says it shouldn’t be nailed down to a week because it should be a private matter between a woman and her doctor. There shouldn’t be a precise number put on that. Is that what you believe as well?”

Harris responded yet again, “I believe that we should put the protections of Roe v. Wade into law.”

Harris cited Roe four times, despite Brennan's follow-up questions asking for more details. Eventually, Brennan moved to a different issue. Harris's evasion leads many pro-lifers to continue their belief that Biden's administration and its allies in the legislature will continue pushing for abortion without limits.

Click here to read more.

Veterans Affairs Training Program Promotes Abortions as "opportunities for growth"

A leaked memo from the US Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs shows how the Biden administration's Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is promoting abortion to veterans, their dependents, and VA staff.

CatholicVote obtained a leaked memo and a VA staff training video showing the department's pro-abortion activism. The training video described abortions as "opportunities for growth," and it invites staff to encourage abortion in a "sensitive, inclusive, and affirming" way.

The memo notes GOP legislators' concerns that the VA's pro-abortion policies allow the VA to offer abortion when there is a threat to the mother's "health." The VA can interpret "health" broadly and subjectively. If a veteran or dependent claims to have a mental health concern, the VA is encouraged to offer taxpayer-funded abortion. The VA is not required to refer the mother for mental health support, treatment, or guidance.

President Biden's pro-abortion VA policy disregards a 1992 law prohibiting the VA from committing abortion. It also ignores Hyde Amendment language prohibiting most taxpayer-funded abortions.

Between September 2022 and February 2023, the VA funded 34 abortions. Twenty-four were provided under the subjective "health" exception, seven were provided because of rape, and one was provided due to danger to life.

Click here to read more.

Oregon Right to Life Sues over Abortion Coverage Mandate

On September 5, Oregon Right to Life (ORTL) filed a lawsuit in federal court to challenge Oregon's abortion coverage mandate for employee health plans.

Oregon's 2017 Reproductive Health Equity Act includes exceptions for religious organizations, but ORTL does not qualify as a religious organization under the law's definition. The definition only applies to organizations that primarily serve people with the same religious beliefs.

“As a pro-life organization, no one questions that we hold deep moral objections to abortion,” said ORTL executive director Lois Anderson in a statement. “We are only asking for what every American expects, to be free to live according to our conscience and operate our organization according to our sincerely held belief that unborn human beings deserve protection from the violence of abortion.”

ORTL's press release continues, "Because Oregon’s Mandate allows exceptions, Oregon must prove a compelling reason for not allowing ORTL an exception. But the courts have already rejected the reasons Oregon might assert as not compelling. For example, because ORTL’s employees agree with ORTL’s beliefs, Oregon has no compelling reason to require coverage since the employees don’t want it. So ORTL should get an exception."

ORTL compares this case to a similar abortion coverage mandate levied by California. In the Supreme Court's 2021 decision, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, the court found that California violated the First Amendment religious liberty protections of churches.

Click here to read more.

Planned Parenthood Sues Overturn Law Allowing Whistleblowers to Report Fraud

On September 1, Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit against the federal government in an attempt to overturn a provision of the False Claims Act (FCA). The portion in question allows private citizens to sue under the FCA if they believe a defendant has fraudulently used taxpayer dollars.

If a citizen chooses to sue under the FCA, the federal government can decide whether to investigate. If the government steps in and the case succeeds, the citizen can receive some of the recovered funding.

Planned Parenthood argued that the law allows private citizens to take the role of government officials enforcing the law, violating a US Constitutional provision that such officials be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

“In fact, FCA relators are not ‘appointed’ to their positions by anyone other than themselves,” Planned Parenthood said.

Planned Parenthood cited opinions by Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett in FCA-related cases.

In recent years, a whistleblower alleged that Planned Parenthood defrauded Texas's state Medicaid program of $10 million after Texas removed the abortion giant as a Medicaid provider. Planned Parenthood was released after the Center for Medical Progress exposed the organization for trafficking in body parts harvested from aborted children. Those funds are currently being pursued.

“It is unthinkable that Planned Parenthood would continue to take advantage of funding knowing they were not entitled to keep it,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said. “I will not allow them to benefit from this abhorrent conduct after they were caught violating medical standards and lying to law enforcement.”

Click here to read more.

Woman Sues Planned Parenthood after Misdiagnosis Leads to Potential Infertility

Kipenzi Chidinma is suing Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley for malpractice after their misdiagnosis led to injury and potential infertility.

Chidinma visited Planned Parenthood in March of 2022 to speak with a doctor. Chidinma was experiencing abnormally heavy vaginal bleeding, headaches, hormonal imbalance, and bloating. She also told Planned Parenthood's doctor, Catherine Khoo, that she had a mass in her stomach. Chidinma requested an ultrasound, but Khoo refused.

Chidinma's lawsuit states, “Despite plaintiff’s repeated efforts, (Planned Parenthood) utilized their position of superior knowledge and wrongfully, negligently and incorrectly diagnosed plaintiff with simple constipation.”

For several months, Planned Parenthood also denied Chidinma's requests for additional testing and referral to a specialist. As her condition worsened, she eventually learned that Planned Parenthood didn't even have an ultrasound machine. When Planned Parenthood finally provided a referral, Chidinma found that she had large, advanced fibroids in her uterus.

Uterine fibroids are known to cause infertility in some cases. Because Planned Parenthood did not assist Chidinma when she informed them of her symptoms, her condition has developed to the point that only surgical treatments remain. Chidinma may have to undergo a hysterectomy, which would remove her uterus entirely.

Click here to read more.

California Pays $192,706 to Settle Buffer Zone Lawsuit

Right to Life of Central California Sidewalk Counselors

California officials have agreed to settle a lawsuit brought against the state's buffer zone law by pro-life advocates.

California SB 742, which was signed into law by pro-abortion Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2021, prohibited certain speech within 100 feet of a "vaccination site." Prohibited actions include approaching a person for conversation without consent, moving toward someone while holding a sign, or offering written materials.

These prohibitions applied even if the speaker is on his own property if it is within 100 feet of a "vaccination site." This was a particular issue for Right to Life of Central California, which was situated next door to a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic. Because Planned Parenthood offers HPV vaccines, SB 742 prohibited Right to Life of Central California from offering pro-life resources on its own property.

Alliance Defending Freedom represented Right to Life of Central California in this case.

“Women facing unplanned pregnancies deserve to have full support and resources available to them when they choose life for their unborn children, yet the state of California unconstitutionally tried to silence the voices of those advocating on their behalf,” said ADF Senior Counsel Denise Harle. “This is a significant victory not only for our client, Right to Life, but for every other speaker in California. The First Amendment protects every Californian, regardless of their viewpoint. Now Right to Life’s staff and volunteers can continue their critical mission of serving vulnerable women in the central California region with their free, life-giving services.”

As part of the settlement, California officials are prohibited from enforcing discriminatory parts of SB 742 against Right to Life of Central California or any other speaker. The state will also pay $192,706 in attorney fees to Right to Life of Central California.

Click here to read more.

Judge Pauses Order Against Southwest Airlines in Pro-Life Firing Case

On August 24, a federal judge put a 30-day pause on an order requiring Southwest Airlines lawyers to take religious freedom training. The training was court-ordered after Southwest fired a flight attendant for voicing pro-life opinions in opposition to her union leader.

US District Judge Brantley Starr ordered Southwest to pay $800,000 to Charlene Carter (the fired flight attendant) and rehire Carter at her previous position.

Southwest was required to inform employees that it cannot discriminate against employees based on their religious beliefs. Instead told employees in a memo that it "does not discriminate against our employees for their religious practices and beliefs." Southwest's statement failed to comply with the court's order by denying wrongdoing after the airline was found guilty.

After Southwest failed to comply with the court order, Starr ordered the airline to issue a court-written statement to its employees. Further, it ordered three lawyers at Southwest to undergo "training on religious freedom" from an attorney from Alliance Defending Freedom.

Starr delayed the enforcement of his order because Southwest appealed his decision to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The delay gives the 5th Circuit time to consider the case.

Click here to read more.

American College of OB/GYNs Announces Support for Abortion "without limitations"

The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists (ACOG) announced in an op-ed to the Washington Post that it supports abortion "without restrictions, without limitations, and without barriers."

The pro-abortion op-ed was penned by ACOG interim chief executive Christopher Zahn and Society of Family Planning (SFP) interim director of advocacy & public affairs Jenni Villavicencio. The pair wrote this op-ed in response to a pro-life op-ed by Kellyanne Conway and SBA Pro-Life president Marjorie Dannenfelser. The pro-lifers op-ed was titled "Republicans need to go on the offense about abortion."

Zahn and Villavicencio accuse pro-lifers of misleading Americans on the safety of abortion. Not only did they claim that abortion is safe, refusing to acknowledge that a "successful" abortion always takes a human life, but they argued that abortion "improves and saves lives."

They concluded, “Abortion is safe. It improves and saves lives, and it must be available without restrictions, without limitations and without barriers — just as any other critical part of health care.”

“As an obstetrician for the last 30 years, I have advocated and cared for both of my patients — mothers and their unborn children,” said Dr. Ingrid Skop, M.D., F.A.C.O.G., a board-certified OB/GYN and vice president and director of medical affairs at Charlotte Lozier Institute. “This brazen proclamation from ACOG, while sad to see, is reflective of a discouraging new reality: In ACOG’s leadership and the broader medical community, there’s no place for dissent on the issue of unlimited abortion for any reason, at any time during pregnancy.”

She added, “We are witnessing, in real time, a vocal, political takeover of a scientific community that represents the most honorable and beautiful profession, responsible for safely bringing new life into the world.”

Click here to read more.

Happy Labor Day!

 

"Dr. Death" Euthanasia Org Approved for Non-Profit Status

Americans can now give tax-deductible donations to fund the creation of Philip "Dr. Death" Nitschke's suicide machines.

Nitschke is an Australian assisted suicide activist known for developing machines that perform euthanasia. Nietchke's projects include a "death switch" to be implanted in the bodies of those with dementia, an AI tool that would determine a person's "mental capacity" to choose suicide, and the 3-D printed "Sarco" machine.

Sarco (based on sarcophagus) is a coffin-sized machine that an assisted suicide victim would lay inside. After the person is sealed inside the Sarco, it would fill with nitrogen gas. This would cause the victim to pass out. Then, the machine drops the interior oxygen levels to zero. The person inside asphyxiates. Afterward, to save on cost, the device can serve as the victim's burial coffin.

Nitschke's primary organization, Exit International, even entices foreigners to travel to Switzerland to be killed.

By virtue of granting 501-(c)3 non-profit status to his spinoff organization, Exit Generation, Americans can get tax deductions to fund the killing of vulnerable adults. Those who suffer from chronic illness or depression deserve compassion, not death.

Click here to read more.

Flossmoor Planned Parenthood Hospitalizes Two Women within Two Weeks

The Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Flossmoor, Illinois hospitalized two women within a two-week span in July.

Operation Rescue, a pro-life organization that documents medical emergencies caused by abortion businesses, obtained 911 records for both incidents. The first occurred on July 13, and the second occurred on July 25. You can listen to recordings of the 911 calls here.

On July 13, a Planned Parenthood employee called 911 to request an ambulance for a 29-year-old woman. The patient was having a seizure following an abortion she received 45 minutes prior.

During a surgical abortion, seizures could be caused by accidental intravascular injection of anesthetic or blood loss from uterine perforation.

Abortion via pill could also cause seizures. Misoprostol, the second pill in the abortion pill regimen, can cause hemorrhaging and lead to seizures.

On July 25, a different employee called 911 to request an ambulance for a woman with "uncontrolled bleeding from the cervix." This is most likely caused by uterine perforation during a surgical abortion.

Operation Rescue only obtains 911 records for emergencies after they are reported by pro-life sidewalk counselors or other witnesses.

Click here to read more.

Pro-Lifers Incarcerated after Guilty Verdict in DC FACE Act Trial

On August 29, a jury in Washington DC found five pro-life activists guilty of conspiracy against rights and violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. The group was immediately incarcerated since the act of blocking access to a DC abortion business was deemed "violent."

After Roe v. Wade was overturned, President Biden's administration made abortion one of its top priorities. This shift in priorities included directing the Department of Justice to increase its enforcement of FACE. The prosecution in this case was led by government attorney Sanjay Patel, the same attorney who failed to prosecute Mark Houck.

The FACE Act prohibits “violent, threatening, damaging, and obstructive conduct intended to injure, intimidate, or interfere with the right to seek, obtain, or provide reproductive health services.”

Nine pro-life activists were indicted in connection with an October 2020 rescue, but only five of them stood trial in this case. The others will stand trial in September.

The full list of pro-lifers involved includes Lauren Handy, 29; Jonathan Darnel, 40; Jay Smith, 32; Paulette Harlow, 73; Jean Marshall, 72; John Hinshaw, 67, Heather Idoni, 61;  William Goodman, 52; and Joan Bell, 74; and Herb Geraghty, 25.

Handy, Geraghty, Idoni, Goodman, and Hinshaw were found guilty on August 29.

“Handy, Smith, Harlow, Marshall, Hinshaw, Idoni, Goodman and Bell forcefully entered the clinic and set about blockading two clinic doors using their bodies, furniture, chains and ropes,” a DOJ press release said. “Once the blockade was established, Darnel live-streamed footage of his co-defendants’ activities.”

Thomas More Society Senior Counsel Steve Crampton represented the pro-lifers. He criticized the DC jury's decision:

"In an unexpected twist, the Court found that because the violation of FACE — in this case — was a crime of ‘violence,’ all five defendants must be immediately incarcerated. So, the defendants were led out of the courtroom by an army of U.S. Marshals.

This is an outrage, and the one thing the defendants had really agreed upon was to remain non-violent. The real violence is what happens during the abortion procedure."

The first five pro-lifers now await sentencing. This could include up to 10 years for the conspiracy charge, one additional year for the FACE Act violation, $350,000 in fines, and three years of supervised release.

Click here to read more.

Clinic for Women Employee Caught Illegally Selling Abortion Drugs from Home

Pro-lifers in Danville Rallying Against Clinic for Women
photo credit: Mark Lee Dickson

On August 23, an employee of Clinic for Women, the Indianapolis-based abortion business currently in the process of relocating to Danville, Illinois, was caught illegally selling abortion pills out of her home.

Real News Michiana (RNM) reporter Clifton French "posed as an 8-week pregnant transgender man by the name of Randall Fisher attempting to schedule an appointment in the hopes that the clinic would confirm their [Indianapa location's] closure." Clinic employee Bridget Bridgeforth took down the reporter's phone number and called him back several hours later, offering to sell abortion pills at her home for $500.

Abortion is now illegal in Indiana, barring exceptions for rape, incest, fatal fetal diagnoses, or if the mother's life is at risk. Bridgeforth admitted this in her conversation with French, saying that they should pretend the transaction occurred before the law went into effect.

Audio recordings of each phone call are available on RNM's website.

After these discussions, RNM reported the incident to the Indiana Attorney General's Office. The news outlet also found court records indicating Bridgeforth had at least three arrests on her record for possession of illegal drugs.

RNM followed up Clinic for Women as well. Clinic Director LaDonna Prince claimed to be unaware of Bridgeforth's actions. After RNM provided recordings, she said that she would contact the police.

Click here to read more.

Chicago Alderman Pushes for "Noise-Free" Buffer Zones

Chicago Ward 34 Alderman Bill Conway (D)

Chicago Ward 34 Alderman Bill Conway (D) announced that he hopes to further impede pro-life advocates' freedom of speech by creating a "quiet zone" outside abortion businesses. Chicago's 2009 "bubble zone" ordinance already prohibits pro-lifers from approaching others within 50 feet of an abortion business's entrance. 

“They’re yelling at them, chanting, speaking through a bullhorn towards them. I’ve seen them handing out literature as well. It’s really all of the above,” Conway told Block Club Chicago. “All of this, of course, is meant to intimidate people seeking services or discourage them from getting access to health care at all.”

“People probably think this doesn’t happen in Chicago, and it does,” he said. “I think this shows that we really need to increase our efforts across every level of government to make sure folks can access health care and exercise their constitutional rights.”

Ironically, pro-life advocates are incentivized to use voice amplifiers due to the buffer zone ordinance. If sidewalk counselors are legally prohibited from speaking to women at a normal conversation range, it is the only logical way that they can offer assistance to abortion-vulnerable women.

Block Club reports that Conway will need to work with the Chicago Department of Health and the police department to designate a noise-sensitive area. Then, city leaders would need to pass an ordinance.

This follows the July "transition report" released by Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D); in which he announced plans to prosecute pro-life sidewalk counselors for disorderly conduct.

Click here to read more.

South Carolina Supreme Court Upholds Heartbeat Law

On August 23, the South Carolina Supreme Court decided 4-1 to uphold the state's new law protecting pre-born children at six weeks gestation.

South Carolina's “Fetal Heartbeat and Protection from Abortion Act” protects preborn children with detectable heartbeats from the violence of abortion. A child's heartbeat is typically detectable by ultrasound in the sixth week of development.

The law contains exceptions for cases of rape and incest up to twelve weeks, after the unborn child is diagnosed with a fatal fetal anomaly, or when the mother's physical health is at serious risk of irreversible harm.

In the latter case, physicians are legally required to "make all reasonable efforts to deliver and save the life of an unborn child during the process of separating the unborn child from the pregnant woman."

The law further prohibits the use of state funding for abortion-related expenses (such as travel to a pro-abortion state for the purpose of obtaining abortion) and requires men to provide child support from the date of conception.

Justice John Kittredge wrote in the majority opinion that the pro-life law “infringes on a woman’s right of privacy and bodily autonomy,” but said that “virtually every law operates in some manner to limit a person’s privacy.” He continued that this right does not outweigh “the interest of the unborn child to live.”

“For example, no rational person would contend the State does not have the authority to enact laws criminalizing assault, rape, theft, child abuse, drug trafficking, and the like. In these and so many other areas, the power of the State to regulate and prohibit conduct is unquestioned. There is not the slightest prospect that a court would contravene the will of the people, as codified by their elected representatives, because the law amounts to an invasion of privacy.”

“The Supreme Court’s ruling marks a historic moment in our state’s history,” said Governor McMaster, “and is the culmination of years of hard work and determination by so many in our state to ensure that the sanctity of life is protected. With this victory, we protect the lives of countless unborn children and reaffirm South Carolina’s place as one of the most pro-life states in America.”

“South Carolina’s new law will save hundreds of lives each month,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “We thank the South Carolina legislature and Governor Henry McMaster for their dedication to protecting the right to life. We also praise our South Carolina affiliate, South Carolina Citizens for Life, for their hard work and diligence in seeing the bill pass and become law.”

Click here to read more.