Appeals Court Lifts Injunction Against Indiana Abortion Laws

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided on Wednesday to lift an injunction placed against multiple Indiana abortion laws last month. This means that Indiana can enforce five previously blocked abortion laws while the appeals process continues.

The laws require that

• all second-trimester surgical abortions occur in licensed surgical centers or hospitals
• women receive abortion pills only during in-person visits with physicians
• patients receive in-person physical examinations before having abortions
• abortion pills never be distributed through the mail via telemedicine

Federal Judge Sarah Evans Barker had struck down these laws in August, but Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita appealed her ruling. “We would expect our commonsense laws to be upheld as the appeal continues,” Rokita said in a statement. “Protecting the culture of life is the top priority of my office, and we will continue fighting for every life alongside our legislative partners.”

The Seventh Circuit ruling notes that the state has a good chance at winning its legal battle supporting the pro-life laws.

Click here to read more.

DOJ Pushes Federal Judge to Block Texas Heartbeat Act

This Tuesday, as part of the lawsuit the Biden Department of Justice filed against Texas last week, DOJ attorneys asked a federal judge to issue a preliminary injunction against Texas's new law prohibiting abortions of unborn children whose heartbeats are detectable.

DOJ attorneys argued that an injunction "is necessary to protect the constitutional rights of women in Texas and the sovereign interest of the United States in ensuring that its States respect the terms of the national compact."

Earlier this month, the Supreme court ruled on technical grounds that abortion providers had not made a sufficient case against the Texas Heartbeat Act. They made a 5-4 decision declining to block the law's enforcement, but that decision did not rule on the constitutionality of the Heartbeat Act's enforcement. Legal challenges could still make their way to the Supreme Court and potentially get a different result.

Texas's heartbeat act is resistant to normal means of legal challenges because it is enforced via civil lawsuits rather than direct action by Texas officials. Individuals in Texas can file lawsuits against abortionists or those who assist in the abortions of children with detectable heartbeats.

Click here to read more.

6th Circuit Blocks Enforcement of Tennessee Pro-Life Law

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling on Friday, Sept. 10 blocking the enforcement of pro-life Tennessee law.

The law takes several steps to reduce the number of abortions in Tennessee. Except in cases where abortion is deemed necessary to save the mother's life, the law bans

• discriminatory abortions due to race, sex, or Down Syndrome diagnosis
• abortions after the unborn baby's heartbeat is detectable
• abortions for juveniles currently in the custody of the Department of Children's services. Additionally, the option to receive a waiver from a judge was removed for this circumstance

The law also requires abortion clinics to provide information to women informing them about abortion pill reversal.

The law further includes tiered bans on abortion. If the courts conclude that the six-week ban (the heartbeat portion of the law) is unconstitutional, "cascading bans" can go into effect. The law automatically enacts abortions at eight, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 weeks of gestation in the case that courts strike down bans at younger gestational ages. While courts have enjoined the law pending decisions on its constitutionality, none of these bans are enforceable.

Click here to read more.

Police Evacuate Texas Right to Life Employees After Bomb Threat

Police evacuated Texas Right to Life employees from their headquarters on Friday, Sept. 10 after the pro-life organization received a bomb threat.

Texas Right to Life had received a bomb threat in an email. After that, a postal worker delivered a package that staff members deemed suspicious. They called the police, who immediately evacuated the building and called in the Houston Police Department's bomb squad. While x-ray review found that the package was not harmful, the police say that they will begin an investigation into the threat.

Bellaire Police Department Chief Onesimo Lopez told Fox News, “We take these kind of threats very seriously. Our Criminal Investigations Division is conducting an investigation into the threats and will follow up on any leads that develop. No other information is available at this time.”

Texas Right to Life received an influx of criticism from pro-abortion advocates shortly before the new Texas Heartbeat Act went into effect on Sept. 1. Texas Right to Life had volunteered to assist Texans in filing lawsuits against those who break the Texas Heartbeat Act. The Texas Heartbeat act empowers individuals in Texas to file lawsuits against those who abort babies with detectable heartbeats or those who aid in that process, such as paying for abortions or providing transportation (the mothers can't be sued under the law).

“We understand that some people will use violence to achieve their ends,” said Texas Right to Life Vice President Elizabeth Graham. “Sadly, the violence of abortion has been used for over 45 years so people can live as they wish; Texas Right to Life mourns violence both inside and outside of abortion facilities.”

“These recent crimes and conspiratorial acts against our work and our dedicated staff will not stop Texas Right to Life from ensuring that the Texas Heartbeat Act is enforced,” Graham continued “We are resolved more than ever to strengthen programs and outreach to abortion-vulnerable women to empower them to choose life.”

Click here to read more.

Saint Xavier University in Chicago Covers Abortion in Student Health Plan

Saint Xavier University in Chicago—a Catholic school—is offering a student health care plan that includes abortion coverage for the second year in a row.

The College Fix reported on the plan last month. Its coverage noted that the Archdiocese of Chicago declined to comment on Saint Xavier University's policy.

“Benefits include abortion care services,” the student health insurance plan says. The plan also covers contraception and sterilization procedures.

Sarah Michalak, a Catholic SXU graduate who grew up in the Archdiocese of Chicago, now works as the Students for Life of America Upper Midwest Regional Coordinator. In an interview with The College Fix, she voiced her disappointment with her alma mater.

“As an alumna of Saint Xavier University, I am disappointed to see they are not upholding their Catholic ideals,” Michalak said. “Catholic universities should be beacons of life, love and truth. It’s the responsibility of Catholic universities to authentically care for their students, and abortion is not authentic support for pregnant and parenting students,”

“We know that abortion is not authentic support and we will fight for pregnant and parenting students and preborn babies,” Michalak said. “If the university is unaware of this inconsistency, we are hoping that they will correct their error immediately.”

Click here to read more.

Montana AG Asks Court to Dismiss Challenges to Pro-Life Laws

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen

Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit last month against the state of Montana over four pro-life laws passed in the state's most recent legislative session. Last Tuesday, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen called on Yellowstone District Court to reject Planned Parenthood's attempt to have the laws blocked before they can be enforced.

The Montana laws include a ban on abortion after unborn children reach 20 weeks gestation, a requirement that women be given the option to view an ultrasound before having an abortion, informed consent requirements for abortion pills, a ban on the distribution of abortion pills through the mail, and a ban on federal exchange health plans in Montana from paying for abortions.

“Because the regulations at issue protect women from the very people who are suing against these laws, Planned Parenthood has no basis for asking the court to halt what the legislature had every prerogative to pass,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Denise Harle in a statement.

Without court intervention, the pro-life laws are set to take effect on October 1.

Click here to read more.

Pro-Abortion Groups File Lawsuits Against Oklahoma Pro-Life Laws

Oklahoma State Capitol

Several pro-abortion groups filed a lawsuit against the state of Oklahoma in an attempt to block several pro-life laws from taking effect next month.

The pro-life laws in question take significant strides to reduce the number of abortions in Oklahoma. The potential abortion regulations that could restrict abortions in Oklahoma starting on Nov. 1 include the following:

• medical professionals who abort children for reasons other than to save the mother's life or to “prevent substantial or irreversible physical impairment” would have their medical licenses suspended for at least one year
• abortions after an unborn child's heartbeat can be detected would be prohibited
• only doctors who are board-certified in obstetrics and gynecology would be allowed to commit abortions
• the use of abortion pills would face multiple new regulations

The Oklahoman reports that the abortion organizations suing the state of Oklahoma over the pro-life laws include The Center for Reproductive Rights, multiple Planned Parenthood affiliates, the Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice, Tulsa Women’s Reproductive Clinic, and others.

Click here to read more.

Biden Administration Sues Texas over Heartbeat Law

Attorney General Merrick Garland

On Thursday, the Biden administration announced its lawsuit against the state of Texas over its new law banning most abortions on unborn children with detectable heartbeats.

The Justice Department's complaint filed in a Texas federal district court argues that Texas acted “in open defiance of the Constitution” in restricting “most pre-viability abortions.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland further argued in favor of the filing. “The Act is clearly unconstitutional under longstanding Supreme Court precedent,” Garland said. “The United States has the authority and responsibility to ensure that no state can deprive individuals of their constitutional rights through a legislative scheme specifically designed to prevent the vindication of those rights.”

The Justice Department's lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction against state officials and “private parties who would bring suit under the law, from implementing or enforcing” the law.

This is the latest pro-abortion effort to block the democratically passed law. So far, the Texas Heartbeat Act has survived court challenges. The Supreme Court gave a 5-4 decision last week not to grant a temporary injunction against the Heartbeat Act's enforcement while the case goes through the lower courts. The Justice Department's case may provide another avenue for pro-abortion advocates to block the law's enforcement.

Click here to read more.

Website Hosting Service GoDaddy Deplatforms Texas Right to Life Whistleblower Site

Last week, website hosting service GoDaddy brought down Texas Right to Life's website designed to help Texans report violations of the new Texas Heartbeat Act. GoDaddy had originally hosted the website, but complaints from pro-abortion groups caused the company to refuse its service to Texas Right to Life.

Texas Right to Life responded in a press release,

"Pro-abortion advocates tried for over a week to overwhelm the website with traffic and fake tips. When they failed, keyboard warriors harassed GoDaddy to take down our site."

Texas Right to Life Director of Media and Communication Kimberlyn Schwartz wrote,

“We will not be silenced. If anti-Lifers want to take our website down, we’ll put it back up. No one can keep us from telling the truth. No one can stop us from saving lives. We are not afraid of the mob. Anti-Life activists hate us because we’re winning. Hundreds of babies are being saved from abortion right now because of Texas Right to Life, and these attacks don’t change that.”

At the time of writing, the website has not yet been reactivated with another hosting service. Texas Right to Life Vice President Elizabeth Graham told Fox Business that the group was in contact with several hosting services friendly to the pro-life cause, however. She anticipates that other pro-life groups will soon be switching hosts for their own websites, as well. “We’re just glad that they canceled,” Graham said, “because we were able to out them as siding with the abortion crowd, and what’s even better is that we don’t want the abortion affiliated platform hosting a pro-life website.”

Click here to read more.

South Dakota Gov. Signs Executive Order Banning Telemedicine Abortions

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R)

On Sept. 7, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem signed an executive order preventing doctors from using telemedicine to prescribe abortion pills. Instead, doctors in South Dakota will need to see women in person to prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol.

Before April 2021, the FDA required that women throughout the United States see doctors in person before being receiving prescriptions for the abortion pill regimen. The FDA "temporarily" lifted those requirements due to the pandemic, but pro-life advocates seem to be correct in doubting the Biden administration's intentions. The FDA has already announced plans to consider making permanent changes to how abortion drugs are prescribed. Those changes are expected to go into effect on November 1, 2021.

The FDA restrictions protected women by allowing doctors to confirm the gestational age of pregnancies and properly diagnose conditions such as ectopic pregnancy. If the unborn child's gestational age is older than the mother's guess, or if she has an ectopic pregnancy, going through with the abortion pill regimen can pose significant and deadly risks to the mother as well as her child.

The executive order demands that the South Dakota Department of Health adopt emergency rules including:

• a requirement that physicians examine a pregnant mother in person before prescribing abortion pills
• banning the distribution of abortion-inducing drugs via courier, delivery, telemedicine, or mail service
• banning the distribution of abortion-inducing drugs in schools
• requiring "pill only" clinics to obtain licenses in accordance with South Dakota's surgical abortion clinic licensing requirements
• a requirement that the South Dakota Department of Health collects data on the frequency, complication rate, location, and sex trafficking context of the abortion pill

Click here to read more.

More States Announce Plans to Pass Texas-Style Heartbeat Laws

After seeing that Texas's new Heartbeat Act successfully passed and is now being enforced, other states have announced plans to enact similar legislation and save more unborn lives.

While the Texas Heartbeat Act has not yet made its way through all possible legal channels and may find itself in front of the Supreme Court once again, several states have taken note of the law's success so far. As a result, they have announced plans to draft similar bills to prevent unborn babies in other states from facing abortion.

According to PregnancyHelpNews.com, a subsidiary of Heartbeat International, pro-life lawmakers in Florida, Arkansas, Mississippi, North Dakota, and South Dakota had all announced intentions to pass laws similar to the Texas Heartbeat Act.

• Arkansas State Sen. Jason Rapert ordered a bill be filed in his state "to mirror the Texas SB8 bill."
• Florida Senate President Wilton Simpson said that the Florida legislature is “already working” on a heartbeat act like the Texas one.
• Mississippi State Sen. Chris McDaniel said that he would "absolutely" consider filing legislation to match Texas SB8.
• North Dakota Sen. Janne Myrdal confirmed that legislators in her state are discussing using the Texas Heartbeat Act a template for new legislation in their own state.
• South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, whom some speculate might run for president in the 2024 election cycle, said that she directed her Unborn Child Advocate “to immediately review the new TX law and current South Dakota laws” and make sure South Dakota has the “strongest pro-life laws on the books.”

Click here to read more.

Biden Flops on Belief that Life Begins at Conception

photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

Contradicting his own past statements, President Biden went on record last week stating that he does not believe life begins at conception.

During a press conference, a reporter asked him how he planned to respond to the new Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans abortion after an unborn child's heartbeat is detectable. As part of his response, Biden told reporters that he did not believe life begins at conception.

“I respect people who don’t support Roe v. Wade, I respect their views,” Biden said. “I respect those who believe life begins at the moment of conception and all — I respect that, don’t agree, but I respect that. I’m not gonna impose that on people.”

It's a scientific fact that a unique human being with DNA that is different from both parents is formed during conception. The idea that life begins at conception is also a part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Biden statement disputed these and his own past statements on whether life begins at conception.

In a 2008 interview with the National Catholic Register, Biden said he was “prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception.”

He also involved this belief in his vice presidential debate against Rep. Paul Ryan. “Life begins at conception, that‘s the Church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life,” Biden said. “But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman.”

Biden reiterated this belief as recently as 2015 during an interview with America Magazine. In that interview, he said, “I’m prepared to accept that at the moment of conception there’s human life and being, but I’m not prepared to say that to other God-fearing, non-God-fearing people that have a different view.”

Click here to read more.

Chicago Woman Rescues Abandoned Newborn Found in Trash

Screenshot from WGN News Video

Last month, a Chicago woman found a newborn baby amongst trash while she was looking for recyclable materials. When she opened the drawers of a dresser, she found the newborn baby boy with his umbilical cord still attached. Waste removal services would have taken the baby away with the trash that same day had the anonymous woman not searched the drawers.

The woman held the child until paramedics arrived.

Matthew Lang, one of the firefighters who responded to the emergency, told CBS 2, “I look out the window, and I just see this woman, hysterical, waving her arms.” He had expected the worst, but what he saw was reassuring. “We don’t know who put the baby there, but whoever did left a rosary. My mind went to ease as soon as I saw that baby moving and crying. It was almost surreal.”

Emergency responders took the baby to Lurie Children's Hospital for treatment. Lang went to Facebook to urge parents who feel like they can't take care of their babies to surrender babies to safe havens rather than leave them in the trash.

In Illinois, parents can safely and anonymously surrender newborns 30 days old or younger to any hospital, police station, fire station, or hospital. There will be no legal repercussions to the parents, and the child's life will not be endangered.

Click here to read more.

Planned Parenthood Sues Texas Pro-Lifers over Heartbeat Act

On Thursday, Sept. 2, the day after the Texas Heartbeat Act was allowed to go into effect, Planned Parenthood affiliates filed a lawsuit against Texas Right to Life, its Legislative Director John Seago, and 100 unnamed individuals. This is in an attempt to stop pro-lifers from filing lawsuits against Planned Parenthood affiliates under the new law, which bans abortions after an unborn baby's heartbeat is detectable. On Friday, Sept. 3, Judge Maya Guerra Gamble granted a temporary restraining order in Planned Parenthood's favor.

The judge ruled that the new threat of private lawsuits under the Texas Heartbeat Act creates "probable, irreparable, and imminent injury in the interim for which [Planned Parenthood] and their physicians, staff, and patients throughout Texas have no adequate remedy at law." Judge Gamble added that her ruling upholds Texas Supreme Court precedent, which holds that “the primary consideration for temporary emergency relief is preserving the status quo while courts consider whether plaintiffs have demonstrated a probable right to the relief sought.”

Texas Right to Life Vice President Elizabeth Graham responded in a statement,

“This lawsuit will not stop the work of Texas Right to Life. Estimates are that approximately 150 babies per day are being saved because of Texas Right to Life’s leadership on the Texas Heartbeat Act. Planned Parenthood can keep suing us, but Texas Right to Life will never back down from protecting pregnant women and preborn children from abortion.”

Click here to read more.

Happy Labor Day!

 

Biden Announces "whole-of-government effort" to Undermine Texas Heartbeat Act

US President Joe Biden (D)

Thursday morning, in response to the Supreme Court's decision not to intervene in the legal challenge to a new Texas law banning the abortion of babies with detectable heartbeats, President Biden announced a "whole-of-government" response to ensure Texas women can still have abortions.

In a Tweet, Biden wrote,

"I am launching a whole-of-government effort to respond to this decision -- looking specifically to HHS and DOJ to see what steps the federal government can take to insulate those in Texas from this law and ensure access to safe and legal abortions as protected by Roe."

In a separate statement, Biden said that he was directing his White House Gender Policy Council and the White House counsel to review “what legal tools we have to insulate women and providers from the impact of Texas' bizarre scheme of outsourced enforcement to private parties.”

It is unclear what action Biden plans to take to negate the effects of the legally passed Texas Heartbeat Act.

Click here to read more.

Supreme Court Chooses Not to Intervene in Texas Heartbeat Law Case

Late Wednesday evening, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to deny a petition by abortion businesses to have Texas's newly enforceable heartbeat law temporarily blocked while lower courts deliberate its constitutionality.

“Hopefully, this law will begin saving the lives of tens of thousands of Texas babies, and we look forward to the day that babies’ lives will be spared across America,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life (NRLC).

Texas's new "Heartbeat Act" bans the abortion of babies once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can be as early as six weeks gestation. It is unique from other abortion bans in that it is enforced by giving private citizens the power to file lawsuits against those who commit illegal abortions.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett all ruled to deny the petitions of abortion businesses. Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor, all dissented.

The majority ruled that the abortion businesses did not make a sufficient argument to qualify for relief from the law's enforcement right now.

“The applicants now before us have raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law at issue. But their application also presents complex and novel antecedent procedural questions on which they have not carried their burden,” the majority stated.

The majority emphasized that its decision was not a ruling on the Heartbeat Act's constitutionality, and it could very well rule on this case after it passes through the lower courts.

“In particular, this order is not based on any conclusion about the constitutionality of Texas’s law, and in no way limits other procedurally proper challenges to the Texas law, including in Texas state courts,” the majority ruled.

Click here to read more.

IL Gov. J.B. Pritzker Decries Texas Heartbeat Law

IL Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D)

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker posted on Facebook Wednesday morning with a response to Texas's heartbeat law going into effect:

"My heart hurts for the people of Texas, where their state leaders put their radical and dangerous ideological agenda above the health and safety of the people they serve.

Abortion bans don't ban abortion. They endanger women – none more than rural women, poor women, young women and women of color.

I proudly joined our General Assembly in enacting Illinois’ Reproductive Health Act – guaranteeing the fundamental right to choose and, crucially, the access necessary to make choice possible.

Illinois is proud to be a beacon of hope in the Midwest, as demonstrated by the women forced to travel from Missouri for basic medical care.

But let's be clear: NOBODY should be forced to cross state lines to see a doctor. This latest attack proves reproductive healthcare needs to be enshrined into law."

Pritzker's post falsely claims that not having access to abortion businesses can "endanger" some women. His implication here is likely that women in the categories he listed are more likely to attempt risky self-managed abortion methods such as the infamous "coat hanger abortions." These abortions have a high degree of risk for the mother, and they should not be attempted. They are also entirely unnecessary, however. Crisis pregnancy centers, religious organizations, and pro-life charities all exist to help pregnant women get through difficult and unexpected pregnancies.

He also again touted the Illinois Reproductive Health Act and the fact that it made Illinois an abortion destination for the midwest. This is because it deregulated much of the abortion industry in Illinois, which makes it much easier for abortion businesses to commit health violations. This is very different from a state like Missouri, in which abortion businesses found guilty of health code violations find it very difficult to stay open.

Finally, in Pritzker's last sentence, is yet another admission from a pro-abortion advocate that the right to abortion is NOT law. It has only been the whim of the Supreme Court, and no federal statute or amendment crafted by legislators enacted a right to abortion. This fall, even that precedent will be called into question.

Texas Becomes First State to Enforce Heartbeat Law

The Supreme Court did not act on requests by pro-abortion advocates to block Texas's new heartbeat law before it went into effect on Sept. 1. As a result, Texas has become the first state with an enforceable ban against abortions conducted after an unborn baby's heartbeat is detectable.

Starting on Wednesday, private citizens in Texas could file lawsuits against those who conduct illegal abortions or “knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets” an illegal abortion, “including paying for or reimbursing the costs of abortion through insurance or otherwise.”

Texas Right to Life has already created a website to receive anonymous tips on alleged illegal abortions to help facilitate legal action. Some pro-abortion activists seek to undermine this, however, by flooding the website with false information.

Click here to read more.

Corruption: Abortion Pill Study Author Paid By Pill Manufacturer

In a situation that unfortunately isn't all that uncommon, JAMA Network Open published a study last week claiming that the telehealth distribution of abortion pills during the COVID-19 pandemic has been safe. The catch? The study was co-authored by a doctor who was paid directly by the abortion pill manufacturer.

Before the pandemic, the FDA enforced a set of regulations called the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) on the distribution of abortion pills. These regulations required recipients of abortion pills to meet in person with a doctor before receiving pills. Doing so allowed doctors to correctly date a pregnancy and diagnose any potential conditions such as ectopic pregnancy. If the baby developed past a certain gestational age or there is an ectopic pregnancy, then taking the abortion pill regimen could put the mother's life at risk.

REMS guidelines were put on hold during the pandemic, and the FDA is currently considering whether they will come back at all.

While several of the study's authors have ties to pro-abortion organizations, Dr. Karen Meckstroth has the most direct conflict of interest. The authors even noted such in a disclosure. Meckstroth is the director of Women's Options Center, an abortion business that conducts abortion as late as 23 weeks gestation. The clinic is also a site for a pharmacy-dispensed abortion pill clinic trial.

The study's disclosure reads, “Dr. Meckstroth reported receiving personal fees from Danco, Inc, a distributor of mifepristone, for staffing a US Food and Drug Administration–mandated expert hotline. The mifepristone used in this care was purchased from GenBioPro, not Danco. No other disclosures were reported.”

Click here to read more.