South Carolina House Passes Bill Banning Abortions, Affirming Life Begins at Conception

[Persistent]

South Carolina House Passes Bill Banning Abortions, Affirming Life Begins at Conception

State | Steven Ertelt | Feb 15, 2023

The South Carolina state House has passed a bill banning abortions that would protect the lives of unborn children starting at conception. The measure could make South Carolina the next state to officially ban abortions after the Supreme Court overturned Roe.

The state House approved the Human Life Protection Act on an 83-31 vote. Rep. Jackie Hayes of Dillon was the only Democrat to vote for the bill along with pro-life Republicans.

There is concern that the state Senate will not take up the bill.

Republican senators crafted it in a way they hope will cause justices to flip their 3-2 ruling in a future challenge.

But House GOP leaders called the Senate’s actions unacceptable, setting up a potential standstill between Republicans who rule both chambers. It’s unclear whether either chamber will even consider the other’s bill.

“The House has taken another giant step in protecting human life,” House Speaker Murrell Smith, R-Sumter, said after the vote.

Asked about next steps, Smith said the House GOP passed the bill it has the votes to push through.

“We simply don’t have the votes” to accept the more lenient Senate version, he said.

The pro-life law that restores legal protection to the unborn members of our human family is sponsored by many ranking members of the House including Speaker Murrell Smith, R-Sumter, Majority Leader Davey Hiott, R-Pickens, Judiciary Committee Chairman Weston Newton, R-Beaufort, and House Family Caucus Chairman John McCravy, R-Greenwood.

Amy Baker, lobbyist for South Carolina Citizens for Life, reported that 6,567 pro-lifers contacted members of the House Judiciary Committee via VoterVoice and urged members to support H3774. “Never underestimate the value of your voice,” Mrs. Baker said. “Today in the House Judiciary Committee hearing, legislators across party lines stated the importance of representing their constituents. Continuous advocacy for the unborn should continue so that your Representative knows where you stand.”

Representative McCravy addressed two issues that affected the redrafting of the 2023 Human Life Protection Act. First was the South Carolina Supreme Court’s 3-2 decision to overturn the 2021 Fetal Heartbeat and Protection from Abortion Act. The second was addressing objections of the State Senate which killed the 2022 Human Life Protection Act.

One particularly effective message came from pro-life physician Peter Bleyer, M.D. who wrote to the lawmakers, “As president of South Carolina’s Catholic Medical Guild and medical director of two SC crisis pregnancy centers, I have come to fully understand that it is our refusal to respect life in all its stages which has led to the general disrespect for our profession. If you lie about little things, you will lie about greater ones as well. In denying the humanity of the small, newly conceived human for financial gain, we denied our ethical duty to establish a doctor-patient relationship with the child in the womb and sold out to our patients… Large physician groups have worked tirelessly since the 70s to convince America that not all life has equal value, dehumanizing that which physicians know better than anyone to be completely human. It is disappointing that government must legislate that which physicians have a natural ethical obligation to provide, but I thank you for doing so. Clearly it is necessary. Please pass H3774, the Human Life Protection Act and protect the most vulnerable members of our human family in South Carolina.”

South Carolina Citizens for Life and the state’s coalition of pro-life, pro-family organizations strongly supported H3774. These include the Catholic Diocese of Charleston, Palmetto Family, the South Carolina Baptist Convention, the South Carolina Association of Pregnancy Care Centers, the South Carolina Republican Party, and the Alliance Defending Freedom among others. Numerous pro-life physicians, nurses, and individuals with pro-life stories to tell submitted written testimony in support of H3774.

Meanwhile, the South Carolina state Senate passed a bill to ban abortions on unborn babies whose heartbeats can be detected. The chamber voted 28-12 for the bill, with Democrats voting to support killing babies in abortions and Republicans voting pro-life. Republican Sen. Sandy Senn was the only GOP member to vote against the bill.

Republican lawmakers say the bill is drafted in a manner to conform with a state Supreme Court ruling that overturned the previous heartbeat abortion ban.

Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey emphasized that several clarifications of the bill’s language and repeals of conflicting laws will satisfy a majority on the South Carolina Supreme Court.

The Senate measure includes exceptions for rape, incest, fatal fetal anomaly and the patient’s life and health up to 12 weeks. Meanwhile, a full ban from conception has again advanced to the House floor in a development that threatens to prevent another abortion restriction from becoming law in South Carolina.

Senators moved quickly to advance the long-sought Republican priority. Republican leadership bypassed the traditional committee process to hold a vote this week on the bill. Massey said additional public input was unnecessary given the mountain of testimony over years of hearings on the issue.

House Passes Bill Banning Abortions, Affirming Life Begins at Conception)

[Persistent]

Exodus 20:13 Thou shalt not murder (kill un-Lawfully). 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery [neither personally, nor nationally]. 20:15 Thou shalt not steal [nor make up thine own laws to enable thee to do so by fraud (deceiving people)]. 20:16 Thou shalt not tell lies [not even to thy "Self", neither to, nor] against thy neighbour

Sura 533The (selfish) soul of the other led him to the murder of his brother: he murdered him, and became (himself) one of the lost ones.
5:34. Then "I AM" sent a raven, who scratched the ground, to show him how to hide the shame of his brother. "Woe is me!" said he; "Was I not even able to be as this raven, and to hide the shame of my brother?" Then he became full of regrets-
5:35. On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our Apostles with Clear Signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
5:36. The punishment of those who wage war against "I AM" and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides (Matt. 18:7-9), or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
5:37. Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that "I AM" is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

[Persistent]

[Persistent]

Kentucky Democrats Fail to Overturn Abortion Ban That’s Saving Babies

State | Micaiah Bilger | Apr 3, 2023

The Kentucky legislative session ended Thursday with pro-abortion lawmakers failing to pass any bills to legalize the killing of unborn babies in abortions again.

Pro-life Republicans, who control the state legislature, refused to even consider bills by Democrats and one Republican to get rid of the ban on elective abortions or add exceptions that would have allowed unborn babies to be aborted in certain circumstances for non-medical reasons, according to the Associated Press.

As a result, thousands of unborn babies’ lives are being protected by the state law every year. Approximately 4,000 unborn babies were aborted annually in Kentucky under Roe v. Wade.

After the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe in June, Kentucky and more than a dozen other states began enforcing laws that protect unborn babies by banning or strictly limiting elective abortions. Many are facing legal challenges by pro-abortion groups, but, in Kentucky, the state Supreme Court refused to block the law.

This spring, pro-abortion lawmakers tried to pass bills to allow elective abortions again, but none made it past the committee level, quashing abortion activists’ hopes. according to the AP.

One Democrat, state Rep. Lindsey Burke, said she had hoped her bill to allow legalized abortions again would pass after voters rejected a pro-life state constitutional amendment in November.
“Kentucky voters spoke loud and clear last November,” Burke told the news outlet. “If passing my bill was not possible, then I definitely think more should have been done to carve out at least some exemptions.”

Although voters did reject the amendment, which would have made it clear there is no right to abort an unborn baby in the Kentucky Constitution, they also elected a strong majority of pro-life lawmakers to the legislature.

Prior to the election, pro-abortion groups spent huge amounts of money trying to convince voters to reject the amendment, a lot of it coming from out-of-state abortion activists to fund misleading campaign ads that deceived voters.

State Senate Majority Floor Leader Damon Thayer, who is pro-life, told the AP that he believes the amendment failed, not because Kentuckians aren’t pro-life, but because abortion activists “scared” them with false information.

“I saw it more as the opposing campaign ran a better campaign that scared people into voting ‘no,’” Thayer said.

Currently, 14 states are enforcing pro-life laws that ban or strictly limit abortions, and more are fighting in court to do the same.

All pro-life laws allow abortions when the mother’s life is at risk and, in some states, cases of rape and incest. These make up a very small percent of all abortions in the U.S. Research from the Charlotte Lozier Institute found about 96 percent of abortions are for purely elective reasons.

In June, the Supreme Court overturned Roe in a historic victory for life and returned the power to legislate abortion to the people. Because of Dobbs v. Jackson, states may protect unborn babies from abortion for the first time in nearly 50 years.

Two recent polls show growing public support for legal protections for unborn babies. A Marist College poll found 69 percent of Americans support limiting or banning abortions, up from 62 percent in June. Another new poll from UMass Amherst found a 5-percent drop in those who say Congress should pass a law to make abortions legal nation-wide and a 6-percent increase in support for a national abortion ban, WCVB News reports.

Kentucky Democrats Fail to Overturn Abortion Ban That's Saving Babies -...

[Persistent]

Judge rules Indiana can enforce ban on gruesome dismemberment abortion

Wed Apr 5, 2023

INDIANAPOLIS (LifeSiteNews) – Indiana may enforce its ban on so-called “dismemberment” abortion procedures, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana has ruled, although the law could still face a legal challenge based on a different argument in the future.

Last July, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade , U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker lifted the injunction on a state law that prohibits abortionists from “knowingly or intentionally perform[ing] a dismemberment abortion unless reasonable medical judgment dictates that performing the abortion is necessary: (1) to prevent any serious health risk to the mother; or (2) to save the mother’s life.”
Dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion procedures, commonly used in the second trimester, are more commonly known as “dismemberment abortions” because they function by tearing a preborn baby apart limb by limb.

Bloomberg La w reports that on March 31, Barker ruled that Roe’s overturn meant that abortionist Caitlin Bernard cannot prevail in her argument that the ban violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee that individuals cannot be deprived of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” in the Fourteenth Amendment.

However, Barker also gave Bernard 30 days to submit a new complaint arguing that the ban violates a patient’s “substantive due process claim based on her patients’ right to bodily integrity” in the case of “emergency abortions,” i.e., abortions sought to save a mother’s life or health.
The law in question already contains an exception for physical risks to the mother, but “given that Dobbs does not define ‘elective,’ it is not clear whether an exception such as that in the dismemberment ban which is only for the life and health of the pregnant patient necessarily covers all medical emergencies, including those that would complicate a pregnancy to a point where it would require an immediate, non-elective abortion,” Barker claimed.

Abortion defenders have long objected to the “dismemberment” label as inflammatory and misleading, even though the abortion industry itself has effectively admitted its accuracy. The National Abortion Federation’s (NAF’s) own instructional materials describe dismemberment abortions as “grasping a fetal part,” then “withdraw[ing] the forceps while gently rotating it” to achieve “separation.” Notorious late-term abortionist Warren Hern has described D&Es even more candidly: “[T]here is no possibility of denial of an act of destruction by the operator. It is before one’s eyes. The sensations of dismemberment flow through the forceps like an electric current.”

Defenders also claim that dismemberment abortions are the “safest” second-trimester procedure available (for the mother), but pro-lifers have long argued that the real reason abortionists prefer D&E abortions is because they can fit more into their schedule, and therefore make more money.

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling overturning Roe and restoring states’ ability to set their own abortion laws, Planned Parenthood has suspended abortions and/or closed locations across the country, and pro-life attorneys general have declared their intentions to enforce their states’ duly enacted abortion prohibitions.

But leftists prosecutors in various localities have vowed not to enforce such laws, and pro-abortion activists have pursued a number of strategies to preserve abortion “access,” including enshrining “rights” to the practice in state constitutions, effectively insulating it from ordinary state legislation, as well as supporting interstate distribution of abortion pills and interstate travel for abortion.

Meanwhile, President Joe Biden has called on Congress to codify a “right” to abortion in federal law, which would not only restore but expand the Roe status quo by making it illegal for states to pass virtually any pro-life laws. Democrats currently lack the votes to do so, but whether they get those votes is sure to be one of the major issues of the 2024 elections.

Judge rules Indiana can enforce ban on gruesome dismemberment abortion -...

[Persistent]

Arizona Gov Katie Hobbs Vetoes Bill to Stop Infanticide, Provide Care for Babies Who Survive Abortions

State | Steven Ertelt | Apr 6, 2023

Arizona Gov Katie Hobbs has vetoed a bill that would protect newborns who survive abortions from infanticide.

Arizona Senate Bill 1600 requires medical professionals to provide life-saving medical care to any infant who is born alive, including one born in an abortion. Those who neglect to do so could face criminal charges.

The state Senate passed the bill in February and the state House recently approved it 32-26 with support from Republicans and one Democrat, state Rep. Lydia Hernandez, D-Phoenix.

But Hobbs continued the Democrat party’s extremism on abortion — supporting abortions up to birth and allowing infanticide afterwards.

Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy Action, a pro-life group, condemned the Hobbs veto in remarks to LifeNews.

“Governor Hobbs played coy during her campaign but now her radical views are on full display; she just gave the okay to infanticide,” Herrod said. “Hobbs vetoed a bill today that would have outlawed the intentional hastening of a newborn’s death. The veto allows healthcare workers to withhold needed medical care from newborns, sanctioning death by neglect.”

Herrod continued: “Newborns with life-threatening conditions are sometimes put on a “slow code,” meaning they don’t get the medically appropriate treatment babies without the condition get. Death by neglect is not healthcare. SB 1600 would have ensured those newborns got the chance to beat the odds and live. It is what every human deserves and what every parent expects from healthcare providers entrusted with the lives of new babies. Thank you to Senator Janae Shamp for sponsoring the life-saving bill.”

“Governor Hobbs has just shown her true colors; she is more devoted to her political special interest groups than she is to serving all Arizonans, even the most vulnerable and needy,” she concldued.

In the past two years, 18 babies were reported born alive during abortion procedures in Arizona, according to 2020 and 2021 abortion reports from the state Department of Health Services. Those same years, nearly 400 unborn babies were aborted past 21 weeks gestation. Today, premature babies born are surviving at 21 weeks, thanks to modern medical technology.

Despite the evidence, most Democrat lawmakers attacked the legislation, claiming it would interfere with families’ personal medical decisions and force doctors to provide futile care to dying babies, according to the report.

Pro-life leaders and lawmakers refuted the claims, pointing to language in the bill that allows a parent or guardian to refuse medical treatment for their newborn when the potential risk outweighs the potential benefit to the child or will do nothing more “than temporarily prolong the act of dying when death is imminent.”

During the House debate this week, Republicans and the lone Democrat, Hernandez, said newborns who survive abortions or have serious medical problems deserve the same basic medical care as any other baby.

ACTION ALERT: Send your complaints to Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs.

According to The Sun, Hernandez shared how her sister-in-law had to beg doctors to save her niece’s life when she was born prematurely because doctors thought she would not survive.

“I held her in the palm of my hand,” Hernandez told lawmakers. “She survived and is now 18 years old and is a student at Phoenix Union High School.”

But other Democrats opposed the bill based on false claims that it would force doctors to provide unnecessary medical care to dying babies.

One Democrat lawmaker basically even admitted that she supports infanticide for newborns with severe disabilities because their parents may not be able to care for them.

According to the report:

[Rep. Stacey Travers, D-Phoenix,] said proponents also are making the assumption that parents would be able to deal with a severely handicapped child, like the one cited by Rep. Mae Peshlakai who the Cameron Democrat said was born with just half a brain, even if it was able to survive more than a few hours outside the womb.

“Who do we think we are?” Travers said.

However, House Republicans insisted that newborn babies with disabilities deserve medical care, too.

“This bill comes down to a simple question: If a baby is born alive, even if it is sick or troubled, do we make efforts to try to save that person and treat them with the same dignity we would any other human being in our hospitals, or do we leave them on a table to die?’” said state Rep. Justin Heap, R-Mesa, according to the report. “It is repellent. It is evil.”

Babies survive abortions every year in the United States, but no one knows exactly how many.

LifeNews recently examined abortion data from seven states between 2020 and 2022 and found reports of 34 babies who were born alive in botched abortions. The numbers almost certainly are much higher because most states do not keep track of abortion survivors.

Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control, as well as the personal testimonies of nurses and abortion survivors themselves, also provide evidence that babies survive abortions. According to the CDC, at least 143 babies were born alive after botched abortions between 2003 and 2014 in the U.S., though there likely are many more.

Research by Tessa Longbons of Charlotte Lozier Institute found that protections for babies who survive abortions are inconsistent across the United States, with fewer than half of states maintaining sufficient protections.

Reports from other countries prove that babies survive abortions, too, and legal protections for them are needed. In Canada, the Canadian Institute of Health Information recorded 766 late-term, live-birth abortions over a five-year period in 2018. And in Australia, the country’s health minister admitted that 27 babies survived abortions in the state of Western Australia between 1999 and 2016. A report out of Ireland also suggests babies are surviving abortions and being left to die there.

ACTION ALERT: Send your complaints to Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs.

Arizona Gov Katie Hobbs Vetoes Bill to Stop Infanticide, Provide Care for Babies Who Survive Abortions

[Persistent]

Federal Judge Blocks Dangerous Abortion Pill Nationwide, Saving Babies From Abortion

Steven Ertelt | Apr 8, 2023

A federal judge has issued a ruling that will stop the sales of abortion drugs nationwide and possibly save hundreds of thousands or even millions of babies from abortions.

The abortion drug mifepristone is used for more than half of all abortions in the U.S. every year, or hundreds of thousands of unborn babies, according to the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute.

But a new lawsuit, filed by a group of doctors with the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, challenges the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval and later expansion of the deadly drug under the Clinton, Obama and Biden administrations. Represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, the doctors point to evidence that the FDA ignored safety problems and failed to properly study the risks of mifepristone.

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the Northern District of Texas issued a ruling blocking approval of the dangerous abortion pill.

Kacsmaryk issued a ruling in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA that halts Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the chemical abortion drug mifepristone. The Court provides seven days before this order will go into effect to allow the federal government time to appeal to the Fifth Circuit. This evening the Biden Administration filed its notice of appeal.

Separately, a district court judge, Judge Thomas O. Rice, issued a ruling in the State of Washington v. FDA that preliminarily enjoins the FDA from “altering the status quo and rights as it relates to the availability of Mifepristone under the current operative January 2023 Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy under 21 U.S.C. § 355-1 in Plaintiff States.”

In his decision, Judge Kacsmaryk noted the following:

• Over twenty years ago, the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved chemical abortion (“2000 Approval”). The legality of the 2000 Approval is now before this Court. Why did it take two decades for judicial review in federal court? After all, Plaintiffs’ petitions challenging the 2000 Approval date back to the year 2002, right? Simply put, FDA stonewalled judicial review — until now. Before Plaintiffs filed this case, FDA ignored their petitions for over sixteen years, even though the law requires an agency response within “180 days of receipt of the petition.” (pg. 1)
• Most readers would not define pregnancy to be a serious or life-threatening illness. Even FDA does not earnestly defend that position. True, complications can arise during pregnancy, and said complications can be serious or life-threatening. But that does not make pregnancy itself an illness. (pg. 44)
• One study revealed the overall incidence of adverse events is “fourfold higher” in chemical abortions when compared to surgical abortions. Women who underwent chemical abortions also experienced far higher rates of hemorrhaging, incomplete abortion, and unplanned surgical evacuation. (pg. 45)
• Contrary to popular belief and talking points, the evidence shows chemical abortion is not “as easy as taking Advil.” Compelling evidence suggests the statistics provided by FDA on the adverse effects of chemical abortion understate the negative impact the chemical abortion regimen has on women and girls. When women seek emergency care after receiving the chemical abortion pills, the abortionist that prescribed the drugs is usually not the provider to manage the mother’s complications. Consequently, the treating physician may not know the adverse event is due to mifepristone. Studies support this conclusion by finding over sixty percent of women and girls’ emergency room visits after chemical abortions are miscoded as “miscarriages” rather than adverse effects to mifepristone. Simply put, FDA’s data are incomplete and potentially misleading, as are the statistics touted by mifepristone advocates. (pg. 47)
• The Court does not second-guess FDA’s decision-making lightly. But here, FDA acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns — in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions. There is also evidence indicating FDA faced significant political pressure to forego its proposed safety precautions to better advance the political objective of increased “access” to chemical abortion — which was the “whole idea of mifepristone.” (pg. 57)

The Texas judge ruled that the FDA cannot allow chemical abortion to be prescribed via telemedicine or without an in-person doctor’s visit, while the Washington judge ruled that the FDA must continue providing the abortion pill in accordance with the Biden-era rule changes

While the ruling in the Washington case technically only applies to 12 states, it still stands in direct conflict with the Texas ruling. With two rulings that directly contradict with each other, it is certain that this issue will be resolved by the United States Supreme Court, which just last summer overturned Roe v. Wade.

“This decision shines a light on something that the Biden Administration wants to sweep under the rug – that these drugs do not treat or cure disease but kill unborn children and expose their mothers to dangerous side effects. The FDA should be in the business of ensuring safety, not in taking lives,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life.

Tobias continued, “The abortion industry has pushed for lowering protections for women undergoing a chemical abortion, while it peddles lies about the ease of the method.”

Mifepristone is used in combination with misoprostol, a prostaglandin, to cause an abortion. Mifepristone blocks progesterone, leading to the death of the unborn baby, while the second drug, misoprostol, causes powerful, painful uterine contractions to expel the dead or dying baby.

The FDA recently weakened the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) requirements for the drug to allow it to be dispensed and even mailed by pharmacies.

“Promoters of these pills like to trumpet high safety rates, but neglect to mention how that with hundreds of thousands of women taking these pills, even a couple of percentage points of women hemorrhaging, dealing with infections, and ectopic pregnancy, represents thousands of women desperately seeking treatment, which may or may not be nearby,” said Dr. Randall K. O’Bannon, Ph.D., director of Education and Research for National Right to Life.

First approved under the Clinton administration, mifepristone is used to abort unborn babies up to about 10 weeks of pregnancy – although some abortionists use it later. It works by blocking the hormone progesterone and basically starving the unborn baby to death. Typically, abortion groups also prescribe a second drug, misoprostol, to induce labor and expel the baby’s body.

Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the pro-abortion movement has been pushing abortion drugs even more heavily, and some groups send the drugs to women in pro-life states illegally.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration has been trying to expand the life-destroying drugs even further, first by allowing abortion drugs to be sold through the mail without any direct medical supervision, and, more recently, by allowing pharmacies like Walgreens, CVS and RiteAid to sell them.

In California, public colleges and universities also are required to provide abortion drugs for free on campus, and other Democrat-run states are considering similar mandates.

Along with millions of unborn babies’ deaths, the FDA has linked mifepristone to at least 28 women’s deaths and 4,000 serious complications. However, under President Barack Obama, the FDA stopped requiring that non-fatal complications from mifepristone be reported. So the numbers almost certainly are much higher.

Studies indicate the risks of the abortion drug are more common than what abortion activists often claim, with as many as one in 17 women requiring hospital treatment. A recent study by the Charlotte Lozier Institute found that the rate of abortion-related emergency room visits by women taking the abortion drug increased more than 500 percent between 2002 and 2015.

Another new study from the University of Toronto, “Short-Term Adverse Outcomes After Mifepristone–Misoprostol Versus Procedural Induced Abortion,” published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, found that one in ten women who took the abortion pill had to go to the emergency room, according to Pregnancy Help News.

Federal Judge Blocks Dangerous Abortion Pill Nationwide, Saving Babies From Abortion

[Persistent]

Doctors Urge Supreme Court to Stop Mail-Order Abortions That Kill Babies and Injure Women

National | Micaiah Bilger | Apr 18, 2023 |

Doctors Urge Supreme Court to Stop Mail-Order Abortions That Kill Babies and Injure Women
Doctors urged the U.S. Supreme Court to protect women and babies from the dangerous abortion drug mifepristone Tuesday, saying the U.S. Food and Drug Administration put politics ahead of people’s lives.

The case, filed by doctors with the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, challenges the federal agency’s approval and later expansion of the abortion drug mifepristone under Democrat presidential administrations.

The abortion drug now is used for more than half of all abortions in the U.S., killing hundreds of thousands of unborn babies every year.

“The FDA should have to answer for the damage it has done to the rule of law and the harm it has caused by putting politics ahead of the health of countless women and girls,” said Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Erin Hawley, who is representing the doctors.

In their brief Tuesday, the doctors told the Supreme Court that the FDA failed to study the safety of mifepristone and ignored federal law when it began allowing the drug to be sold through the mail without direct medical oversight.

“Across decades, the agency has stripped away every meaningful and necessary safeguard on chemical abortion, demonstrating callous disregard for women’s well-being, unborn life, and statutory limits,” their brief states.

They urged the Supreme Court to allow a temporary injunction by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to go into effect.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

Earlier this month, a federal judge in Texas temporarily blocked the FDA’s approval of mifepristone as an abortion drug. The Biden administration appealed, and the Fifth Circuit modified the order to allow the abortion drug to remain on the market but only with restrictions that the Biden and Obama administrations had removed.

When the Biden administration appealed again, the Supreme Court put the Fifth Circuit decision on hold until Wednesday to give both parties a chance to make their arguments.

If the high court sides with the doctors, dangerous mail-order abortions could be prohibited in the U.S. as soon as the end of this week. Other regulations that were in effect for many years also would be reinstated.

Here’s more from Courthouse News:

Instead of being able to prescribe abortion pills via telehealth, patients would be required to schedule three doctor visits. Abortion seekers would also be required to take the medication in a doctor’s office instead of at their homes. …

The Biden administration and Danco Laboratories — mifepristone’s maker — asked the Supreme Court for emergency relief on Friday. The government said it would take months for the FDA to relabel any mifepristone currently on the market, the outcome that the Fifth Circuit’s ruling requires. Meanwhile a generic version of mifepristone would have to forfeit its approval.

But the doctors warned that lives are at risk, and the court must block the dangerous abortion drug. As emergency room physicians and OB-GYNs, the doctors said they have witnessed “the enormous pressure and stress caused by emergency treatment from chemical abortion [abortion drugs] gone wrong.”

They said the FDA and Danco have “brazenly flouted the law” for decades, disregarding their own safety data and evading judicial review to push abortion drugs on the American public. Under the Obama administration, the FDA even stopped requiring non-fatal complications to be reported, they continued.

“Without a stay, mifepristone will result in more physical complications, emotional trauma and even death for women,” they told the court.

First approved under the Clinton administration, mifepristone is used to abort unborn babies up to about 10 weeks of pregnancy – although some abortionists use it later. It works by blocking the hormone progesterone and basically starving the unborn baby to death. Typically, abortion groups also prescribe a second drug, misoprostol, to induce labor and expel the baby’s body.

Studies indicate abortion risks are more common than what abortion activists often claim, with about one in 17 women requiring hospital treatment.

Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the pro-abortion movement has been pushing abortion drugs even more heavily, and some groups send the drugs to women in pro-life states illegally.

In recent years, abortion drugs have been used for more than half of all abortions in the U.S., killing hundreds of thousands of unborn babies annually, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration has been trying to expand the life-destroying drugs even further, first by allowing mifepristone to be sold through the mail without any direct medical supervision, and, more recently, by allowing pharmacies like Walgreens, CVS and RiteAid to sell them.

Along with millions of unborn babies’ deaths, the FDA has linked mifepristone to at least 28 women’s deaths and 4,000 serious complications. However, under President Barack Obama, the FDA stopped requiring that non-fatal complications from mifepristone be reported. So the numbers almost certainly are much higher.

A recent study by the Charlotte Lozier Institute found that the rate of abortion-related emergency room visits by women taking the abortion drug increased more than 500 percent between 2002 and 2015.

Doctors Urge Supreme Court to Stop Mail-Order Abortions That Kill Babies and Injure Women

[Persistent]

North Dakota governor signs law banning nearly all abortions

By [The Associated Press]

Published: Apr. 24, 2023

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) – North Dakota on Monday adopted one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the country as Republican Gov. Doug Burgum signed legislation banning the procedure throughout pregnancy, with slim exceptions up to six weeks’ gestation.

In those early weeks, abortion would be allowed only in cases of rape, incest or medical emergency, such as ectopic pregnancy.

“This bill clarifies and refines existing state law which was triggered into effect by the Dobbs decision and reaffirms North Dakota as a pro-life state,” Burgum said in a statement.

The North Dakota Senate passed Senate Bill 2150 42-5 and the House of Representatives 76-14. Both margins were veto-proof majorities.
Last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide has triggered multiple state laws banning or restricting the procedure. Many were met with legal challenges. Currently, bans on abortion at all stages of pregnancy are in place in at least 13 states and on hold in others because of court injunctions. On the other side, Democratic governors in at least 20 states this year launched a network intended to strengthen abortion access in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court decision that nixed a woman’s constitutional right to end a pregnancy and shifted regulatory powers over the procedure to state governments.

The North Dakota law is designed to take effect immediately, but last month the state Supreme Court ruled a previous ban is to remain blocked while a lawsuit over its constitutionality proceeds. Last week, lawmakers said they planned to pass the latest bill to send a message to the state’s high court signaling that the people of North Dakota want to restrict abortion.

Supporters have said the measure signed Monday protects all human life, while opponents contend it will have dire consequences for women and girls.

North Dakota no longer has any abortion clinics. Last summer, the state’s only facility, the Red River Women’s Clinic, shut its doors in Fargo and moved operations a short distance across the border to Moorhead, Minnesota, where abortion remains legal. The clinic’s owner is still pursuing a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of North Dakota’s previous abortion ban.
It’s expected that this new ban will also be the subject of legal challenges.

Republican Sen. Janne Myrdal, of Edinburg, sponsored the latest state legislation.

“North Dakota has always been pro-life and believed in valuing the moms and children both,” Myrdal said in an interview. “We’re pretty happy and grateful that the governor stands with that value.”

Democratic Rep. Liz Conmy voted against the bill and said she had hoped Burgum would not sign it.
“I don’t think women in North Dakota are going to accept this, and there will be action in the future to get our rights back,” Conmy said. “Our Legislature is overwhelmingly pro-pregnancy, but I think women in the state would like to make their own decisions.”

North Dakota governor signs law banning nearly all abortions