Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor Calls Roe Abortion Case "Settled Law"
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Everyone watching the Senate hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor knew the question about abortion case law would come eventually. When it did, Sotomayor gave the answer most political observers expected -- that the Roe v. Wade abortion case is "settled law." Yet, later in her questioning, she admitted that a right to abortion is not found in the Constitution. Roe is the 1973 high court decision that allowed virtually unlimited abortions and has resulted in the deaths of more than 50 million unborn children. Sotomayor told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that she considers the controversial decision "settled law" and says there is a constitutional right to privacy. Later, Sotomayor came under questioning from pro-life Sen. Lyndsey Graham of South Carolina. “Is there anything in the Constitution that says a state legislature or the Congress cannot regulate abortion or the definition of life in the first trimester?” Graham added. “Is there anything written in the document about abortion?” Sotomayor responded, “The word abortion is not used in the Constitution, but the Constitution does have a broad provision concerning a liberty provision under the due process." Full story at LifeNews.comSotomayor Evades Questions About Board Membership on Pro-Abortion Group
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor evaded questions Tuesday afternoon from a senator who wanted to know more about the pro-abortion mission of a Hispanic group she served on the board of directors for during the 1980s. During questioning from pro-life Sen. Lyndsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, Sotomayor was evasive. Graham asked pro-abortion President Barack Obama's high court nominee about Puerto Rican LDF's briefs calling for right to tax-funded abortions. Trying to deflect the questions, Sotomayor told Graham she only raised money for the group during her tenure on its board of directors. Then she admitted she reviewed legal briefs to see if they matched the "mission" of the organization, adding that the mission of the group was very broad and generalized. Sotomayor offered to explain the function of board members of the organization as opposed to members of the day-to-day staff. Graham followed up with a question inquiring about the "mission" of the pro-abortion group and Sotomayor evaded the question. The senator then asked her if she would have been bothered personally if advocating for abortions had been included in the organization's mission statement. Sotomayor merely responded that they organization lobbied for public health issues. Full story at LifeNews.com
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor evaded questions Tuesday afternoon from a senator who wanted to know more about the pro-abortion mission of a Hispanic group she served on the board of directors for during the 1980s. During questioning from pro-life Sen. Lyndsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, Sotomayor was evasive. Graham asked pro-abortion President Barack Obama's high court nominee about Puerto Rican LDF's briefs calling for right to tax-funded abortions. Trying to deflect the questions, Sotomayor told Graham she only raised money for the group during her tenure on its board of directors. Then she admitted she reviewed legal briefs to see if they matched the "mission" of the organization, adding that the mission of the group was very broad and generalized. Sotomayor offered to explain the function of board members of the organization as opposed to members of the day-to-day staff. Graham followed up with a question inquiring about the "mission" of the pro-abortion group and Sotomayor evaded the question. The senator then asked her if she would have been bothered personally if advocating for abortions had been included in the organization's mission statement. Sotomayor merely responded that they organization lobbied for public health issues. Full story at LifeNews.comSenate Panel Continues Promoting Abortion in Health Care, More Votes Expected
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A Senate committee on Monday defeated four new amendments by pro-life advocates determined to stop a health care restructuring bill from paying for and promoting abortions. However, the decrement in the makeup of the Senate has made it so pro-life advocates are losing most committee and floor votes. The Senate HELP Committee ultimately voted down four pro-life amendments, all on 12-11 party-line votes with Sen. Bob Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat, joining Republicans to support the abortion limits. The panel defeated an amendment from Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming to remove the "abortion mandate" from the health care bill and another from Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah to remove the abortion subsidies. The committee also rejected an amendment from Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma to protect state laws limiting abortions and abortion funding from being nullified by federal law under the health care bill and a second that would protect the conscience rights of health care workers. A pro-life advocate expects pro-life Rep. Joe Pitts and other pro-life members of the House Energy & Commerce Committee to offer similar amendments to the House Democratic bill that is expected to be worked up on Thursday. Full story at LifeNews.comACTION: Please contact members of the Senate Help Committee (see http://help.senate.gov) and let them know about how you feel about their votes promoting abortion in health care. Then, contact members of the House Energy & Commerce Committee (http://energycommerce.house.
Poll: Americans Opposed to Nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new poll shows a plurality of Americans are opposed to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, who has been linked to pro-abortion groups, to the Supreme Court. A new Rasmussen national telephone poll finds 38 percent of voters support Sotomayor while 44 percent oppose her nomination. That's a five-point increase in opposition from two weeks ago when 37% were in favor of her confirmation and 39% were opposed. Forty-five percent have a favorable opinion of her, including 20% very favorable while 46 percent view her unfavorably, with 25% very unfavorable. These numbers also have remained largely the same since her nomination was announced, Rasmussen noted. However, the survey also showed Sotomayor helped her case after giving her opening statement during the first day of the hearing on her nomination. Looking at the results of the poll from Monday night alone (the poll also included Sunday) 42 percent of voters favored Sotomayor’s confirmation to the high court, while 44 percent were opposed. "This indicates that while opposition to Sotomayor increased in the days leading up to the hearings, her first day began to reverse that trend. Obviously, where it goes from here depends on what happens at the hearings," pollster Scott Rasmussen said. Full story at LifeNews.com
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Another nominee of President Barack Obama is coming under fire for taking an extreme position in favor of abortion. This time, John Holdren, whom Obama appointed to become Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, is accused of backing forced abortions and population control. Holdren will become Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Informally, the position is known as the Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, Obama's nominee wrote that women could be forced to have abortions whether they wanted them or not. Holdren also said the population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs put into the nation's food or water, advocated the taking of babies from single mothers and giving them to couples, and said that people who “contribute to social deterioration,” such as minorities or other so-called undesirables, should be forced to have abortions. Full story at LifeNews.comNorma McCorvey, of Roe v. Wade Abortion Case, Arrested at Sotomayor Hearing
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Norma McCorvey, the former Jane Roe of the Roe v. Wade case that allowed virtually unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy, was arrested on Monday at the hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. McCorvey was one of a handful of pro-life advocates who interrupted the hearings. Several pro-life peopleshouted out remarks at various points during the hearing, asking lawmakers and Sotomayor herself to remember abortion and the destruction of unborn children. Capitol Police arrested each of the protesters quickly after they began shouting out the comments. McCorvey made her way into the Senate hearing room along with other members of the public who were rotated in and out of the last two rows to allow as many people as possible a chance to spend a few minutes in the hearing room. McCorvey, 61, has been pro-life for many years and was removed from the Hart Senate Office Building hearing room after shouting, "You're wrong, Sotomayor. You're wrong about abortion." Full story at LifeNews.com The battle against FOCA still lies ahead of us - YOUR SIGNATURE MATTERS! If you oppose FOCA provisions and do not want them passed in bits and pieces or under a bill with a different name, then click here and do your part in stopping them! |
Pro-Life Advocates Take Justice Ginsburg to Task for Racist Abortion Comments
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Pro-life advocates are taking Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to task for her comments about the Roe v. Wade abortion case that appeared racist. Last week, in an interview with the New York Times, Ginsburg says she once supported Roe for population control reasons targeting minorities. Roe is the 1973 Supreme Court decision that, along with Doe v. Bolton, allowed virtually unlimited abortions for any reason throughout pregnancy. Ginsburg first advocated taxpayer funding of abortions and followed it up by saying she backs Roe to eliminate "populations that we don't want to have too many of." Congressman Trent Franks, an Arizona Republican, told LifeNews.com he found the remarks off-putting. "Justice Ginsburg's statement is appalling, but should be unsurprising to those who are familiar with the roots of the pro-abortion movement, largely organized by eugenicists who wanted to limit population growth amongst peoples they considered to be 'undesirables,'" he said. He said that more attention needs to be given to the "role racism played in bringing about abortion-on-demand in the United States, as former slave owners and elites turned to eugenics as a means of keeping minorities underfoot." Full story at LifeNews.com
Strasbourg, France (LifeNews.com) -- The European Court of Human Rights has moved a key abortion case to its Grand Chamber, making the international effects of its decision even greater. The case involves the Ireland law that bans most abortions and the move could have more of a legal effect on the court's member states. Abortion advocates hope to overturn Ireland's strong pro-life laws that prohibit abortions unless the life of the mother is in danger. Women who had to travel to England for abortions claim they were denied their rights because the Irish pro-life abortion law requires them to travel out of the country for an abortion. The European Court of Human Rights' recent decision to move the case to its Grand Chamber makes the decision binding on all lower chambers and on all member states. Roger Kiska, who is based in Europe and a legal counsel for the pro-life legal group Alliance Defense Fund, tells LifeNews.com the case could set an official policy on the issue for Europe. Full story at LifeNews.comArizona Gov. Jan Brewer Signs Pro-Life Bills Limiting Abortions, Helping Women
Phoenix, AZ (LifeNews.com) -- Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed into law a package of pro-life bills that would limit abortions by banning the partial-birth abortion procedure, helping women and teens, and protecting pro-life health care workers. Brewer's signature is a change from the days when ex-Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed all pro-life bills. The first measure Brew signed, HB 2400, creates a state ban on partial birth abortions so local prosecutors can make sure the federal partial-birth abortion ban can be better enforced. The second bill, HB 2564, would protect women, parents, children, and the civil rights of health care providers. That legislation calls for informed consent before abortions along with a 24-hour waiting period, parental consent requirements, a prohibition on non-doctors doing surgical abortions, and of conscience for all health care providers, including pharmacists, on abortion and abortion drugs. Brewer also signed SB 1175, a bill to ban non-physicians from doing abortions in the state -- important because a nurse at Planned Parenthood has been putting women's health at risk by doing surgical abortions. Full story at LifeNews.comACTION: Contact Governor Brewer at (602) 542-4331 or (800) 253-0883 or email her atazgov@az.gov and thank her for signing these pro-life bills into law.
Illinois Law for Parental Notification Before Abortion Finally in Effect, Court Rules
Springfield, IL (LifeNews.com) -- In a huge victory for parents in Illinois, a federal appeals court has finally approved a state law allowing parental notification before an abortion to go into effect. The law will help parents help their minor children find better alternatives than abortion and will likely reduce the number of abortions in the state. Today, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals dissolved the federal injunction against the Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act. As a result of the court's decision in Zbaraz v. Hartigan, Illinois parents will be entitled, for the first time since Roe v. Wade in 1973, to receive notification before their minor daughters are taken for abortions. The decision is the culmination of four years work by the Thomas More Society and pro-life attorney Paul Linton, who devised the legal strategy which ultimately led to the lifting of the injunction. "This is an incredible victory for Illinois parents and their children," Peter Breen, director of the Thomas More Society, told LifeNews.com after the decision. Full story at LifeNews.comMassachusetts Abortion Protest Law Doesn't Limit Free Speech, Court Rules
Boston, MA (LifeNews.com) -- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit issued a decision on Wednesday claiming a new buffer zone doesn't unconstitutionally violate the free speech rights of pro-life protestors and sidewalk counselors. The 35-foot “buffer” zone around abortion businesses came under suit from pro-life groups. Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed a lawsuit in federal court in January 2008 saying the law essentially eliminates free speech rights within the zone by restricting pro-life advocates from sharing their message with people entering. The law updated a 2000 statute that established a floating buffer zone, which police and abortion centers said was difficult to enforce. U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro rejected the pro-life lawsuit in August 2008 that the law did not regulate speech but only the location where the speech could occur -- and the appeals court upheld that decision last week. Full story at LifeNews.com
Boston, MA (LifeNews.com) -- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit issued a decision on Wednesday claiming a new buffer zone doesn't unconstitutionally violate the free speech rights of pro-life protestors and sidewalk counselors. The 35-foot “buffer” zone around abortion businesses came under suit from pro-life groups. Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed a lawsuit in federal court in January 2008 saying the law essentially eliminates free speech rights within the zone by restricting pro-life advocates from sharing their message with people entering. The law updated a 2000 statute that established a floating buffer zone, which police and abortion centers said was difficult to enforce. U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro rejected the pro-life lawsuit in August 2008 that the law did not regulate speech but only the location where the speech could occur -- and the appeals court upheld that decision last week. Full story at LifeNews.comArizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, ACLU Fight Over Inmate Abortion Transportation Costs
Phoenix, AZ (LifeNews.com) -- Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the ACLU are battling again over making the government pay for the costs of transporting inmates for abortions. Their previous legal battle went all the way to the Arizona Supreme Court when Arpaio had prohibited the taking of prisoners for abortions. Arpaio decided against transporting prisoners for abortions because taxpayer funds would be involved in the transportation and staff time needed. Arpaio had said the abortions would violate state laws against public funding of abortions but a state appeals court ruled unanimously against his policy and the state Supreme Court upheld that ruling. Now, Arpaio is facing another legal battle from the ACLU for requiring inmates who want abortions to pay the county up front. In December 2008, prison officials asked an inmate identified as “Sarah Poe” to pay $500 for her abortion transportation costs up front. Full story at LifeNews.com
Phoenix, AZ (LifeNews.com) -- Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the ACLU are battling again over making the government pay for the costs of transporting inmates for abortions. Their previous legal battle went all the way to the Arizona Supreme Court when Arpaio had prohibited the taking of prisoners for abortions. Arpaio decided against transporting prisoners for abortions because taxpayer funds would be involved in the transportation and staff time needed. Arpaio had said the abortions would violate state laws against public funding of abortions but a state appeals court ruled unanimously against his policy and the state Supreme Court upheld that ruling. Now, Arpaio is facing another legal battle from the ACLU for requiring inmates who want abortions to pay the county up front. In December 2008, prison officials asked an inmate identified as “Sarah Poe” to pay $500 for her abortion transportation costs up front. Full story at LifeNews.comEncourage Friends to Sign Up for Free Pro-Life News From LifeNews.com
