Search

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a decision in Moyle v. United States, dismissing the case as "improvidently granted." The lower court's pause on the Idaho law in question will remain in place while litigation continues. The National Right to Life was seeking a ruling on the merits, but the Court determined that further resolution is needed in the lower courts. The state of Idaho argued that the government's interpretation of EMTALA would make their pro-life law unenforceable and turn hospital emergency rooms into "federal abortion enclaves." However, the U.S. government clarified during arguments that they were not doing so. The National Right to Life hopes that the lower courts will uphold the Idaho law, which allows for care in cases of miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, and medical emergencies. [Extracted from the article]

The article focuses on the Supreme Court scheduling oral arguments for FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine on March 26, the first abortion-related case since the 2022 Dobbs ruling. It delves into the case involving the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) regulations on mifepristone, the abortion pill, with topics including the original lawsuit, the 5th Circuit's actions, and the upcoming Supreme Court review.

The article details the Georgia Supreme Court's 6-1 decision to reverse a lower court ruling on the "Heartbeat Bill," allowing abortion until a fetal heartbeat is detectable, rejecting claims of unconstitutionality. Topics include the court's interpretation of constitutional law, the timing of the law's enactment, and the ongoing legal considerations surrounding Georgia's abortion restrictions.

The article reports on the leaked draft majority opinion in the Supreme Court case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, suggesting a possible overturning of Roe v. Wade. It discusses the subsequent increase in violence against pro-life groups, with a significant number of attacks and threats. It also addresses the spread of misinformation by the media regarding the effects of pro-life laws on women's health.

The article discusses the ruling by the Ohio Supreme Court that allows a pro-abortion initiative, called "Issue 1," to proceed as a single initiative on the fall ballot. It mentions that the initiative aims to guarantee the right to abortion and protect individuals' decisions on various reproductive matters. It also mentions that the pro-life organizations have raised concerns about the initiative, claiming it expands access to abortion and goes against the protection of the unborn.

The article provides an update on the legal battle surrounding the abortion pill mifepristone. It emphasizes concerns about the drug's safety and criticizes the Food and Drug Administration FDA's approval process. It highlights the need for accountability and protection of women's health in this ongoing legal challenge.

The article reports that Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor spoke at the Association of American Law Schools' annual meeting and expressed her feelings about the U.S. Supreme Court's abortion decision. Topics include the conservative majority for the Sotomayor expressed optimism that the direction of the court will change in the future of the pro-life position; and opposition to killing unborn humans is supported by empirical science and the principle that all human beings have human rights.

The article discusses that Board of State Canvassers placed a pro-abortion amendment on the fall ballot as directed by the Michigan Supreme Court. It mentions that proposed amendment would legalize abortion through all nine months of pregnancy and allow anyone, including people without any medical training, to assist with an abortion.

The article highlights the Co-Chairs of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus Reps. Chris Smith, Michelle Fischbach Andy Harris and Kat Cammack who all applauded the Supreme Court's decision on Dobbs that empowers elected representatives to protect unborn children.

NBC News' Pete Williams wrote Cameron urged the Supreme Court to take Pro-life Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron the case, saying the appeals court's refusal to let him defend the law blocked him from doing what state law requires. National Right to Life News 25 www.NRLC.org April 2021 By Dave Andrusko The Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether or not to allow pro-life Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron to intervene to defend HB 454, the state's 2018 law outlawing the barbaric practice of dismembering living unborn children. [Extracted from the article]

"The abortion industry wants unlimited and unregulated abortion in our state - even live dismemberment of preborn children", stated Jeanne Gawdun, Kansans for Life's Director of Government Relations. The language of the Value Them Both Amendment reads as follows: Because Kansans value both women and children, the constitution of the state of Kansas does not require government funding of abortion and does not create or secure a right to abortion. [Extracted from the article]