Judge Finds Clinic Manager Not Guilty of Battery Against Pro-life Sidewalk Counselor

A judge found the Central Family Medicine abortion clinic manager accused of attacking pro-life sidewalk counselor Mary Anne Sause not guilty. Despite the fact that witnesses close by called the police to report the incident, at trial these same witnesses testified that they did not see the initial contact between Mark Pederson and Ms. Sause.  This isn’t the first time someone from Central Family Medicine has tried to bully and intimidate sidewalk counselors in front of their abortion clinic.  In November 2009, a clinic worker rammed into a pro-life counselor who was 6 months pregnant at the time.  Read more here.

http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/pregnant-pro-lifer-attacked-by-abortion-worker-outside-kc-abortion-clinic/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+OperationRescue+%28Operation+Rescue%29

http://fox4kc.com/2012/01/25/man-found-not-guilty-of-attack-at-abortion-clinic/

Judge Strikes Another Blow to Justice Department’s Targeted Persecution of Pro-life Advocates

In a hearing held on January 26, 2012, attorneys with the U.S. DOJ asked a federal district court judge to order Ken Scott to remain more than 25 feet away from the entrance of a Colorado abortion clinic. Judge Brimmer denied the DOJ’s request, striking a significant blow to the government’s case against Scott.  Scott is a peaceful pro-life advocate who hands out literature and counsels women on the public sidewalks outside abortion clinics.

These actions are constitutionally protected and Scott’s lawyers will vigorously fight to ensure these freedoms are not stripped away by an overzealous Justice Department seeking to silence the pro-life voice in America.  Read more about the Scott case here.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Decrees Insurers Cover Contraceptives “Next Year”

On Friday January 20, 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services announced a one-year reprieve for some insurers to the controversial “contraceptive mandate” issued last August. The mandate requires that all insurance providers cover the full range of FDA-approved contraceptive drugs and devices, including those that can be used post-conception to destroy existing human life.

The reprieve was aimed at a narrow group of insurers: groups that do not already carry contraceptives and who do not already meet the definition of “religious employer.” Those who are allowed to avail themselves of the reprieve will still be forced to tell their employees where to obtain contraceptives.

“Although couched in terms of compromise, this postponement simply adds insult to injury since it protects a mere fraction of those impacted by the mandate, and it does not address the core objections to the mandate: the rule’s evisceration of rights of conscience,” states Dana Cody, Life Legal Defense Foundation’s President and Executive Director. “Waiting a year shifts some of the impact of the mandate down the road, allowing the Obama Administration to appear sympathetic to the American value of freedom of conscience in this election year. The Obama administration shows again that it can play politics well, but has little interest in protecting the sincerely held conscientious beliefs of Americans.”

Numerous groups, including Life Legal Defense Foundation, submitted comments on the contraceptive rule to HHS in September, arguing that the narrow exemption provided for “religious employers” was essentially meaningless. For instance, the exemption would potentially cover places of worship, but would not cover religious groups that provide social services, education or engage outreach to people of different religious faiths, nor would it cover religious health insurance companies, religious health care providers, or individuals.

Legal analysts have suggested that the mandate not only violates existing conscience protections on abortion such as the Hyde/Weldon Amendment (in that drugs that can act as abortifacients are covered, such as Plan B and Ella), but also violates the principles of the Church Amendments which protect the conscience rights of those who object to medical services on moral or religious grounds.

FACE Prosecution Against Susan Pine Dismissed (Fla.)

Justice for one prolife advocate gives hope to others being persecuted by Eric Holder’s Justice Department. Susan Pine was accused of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. A Florida judge dismissed all charges against her pointing out that the government had a complete lack of evidence to prove all three elements required under the FACE claim. The court went so far as to question whether the charges brought by the DOJ were the product of a collaboration between the government and the abortion clinic to violate Ms. Pine’s free speech rights rather than an effort to protect those purportedly injured by Ms. Pine’s actions. In light of the court’s comments in the Pine case, one has to wonder what the motivation is behind other FACE prosecutions like Mr. Retta, Mr. Hamilton, and Ms. Parente.

Pro-Abortion Street Banners Called Out by Life Legal Defense Foundation as Illegal

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 10, 2012 /Christian Newswire/ — It goes without saying that “politics happen” — but they should not happen on the taxpayer dime on lampposts along Market Street in San Francisco. The Life Legal Defense Foundation has challenged the City of San Francisco with a blatant violation of its own city code. This month, inflammatory political statements promoting a Ms. Magazine-initiated pro-abortion campaign now waft over foot and auto traffic, as this municipal local marketing tool is abused, allowing feminist rhetoric to take the place intended for promotion of farmers’ markets and neighborhood festivals.

The city regularly authorizes the display of banners to promote “city-sponsored,” “city-funded,” or “city-wide” events or “series of related events of interest to a significant portion of the residents of San Francisco and/or tourists.” San Francisco does allow some non-event banners to be posted on city-owned utility poles, but they are restricted to “city convention facility banners” and “city neighborhood banners.” A typical non-event banner would be the non-controversial San Francisco State University banners urging San Franciscans to “Support Public Higher Education: The Future Depends On It.”

The offending banners, issued by the Trust Women Silver Ribbon Campaign, bear blatantly political statements, including “U.S. Out of My Uterus,” “Reproductive Rights are Human Rights,” and “San Francisco is Pro-Choice,” slogans which are clearly designed to provoke the ire of those who do not share the printed sentiments. The authors of the Silver Ribbon Month website reference a 2011 pro-abortion Ms. Magazine blog as the impetus behind the project, which is actually an event only in the virtual sense.

“The city minions who ‘approved’ these illegal banners might have thought that the public would ignore the challenge, but they are in error,” said Dana Cody, Executive Director, Life Legal Defense Foundation. “We also believe this puts a stick in the eye of pro-life advocates who will be marching down Market Street on January 21 for the annual Walk for Life.”

A copy of the letter from the Life Legal Defense Foundation attorneys to San Francisco officials is available here.

See photos of the banners here.

Read here to view LLDF’s letter to the Permit Manager of the San Francisco Department of Public Works reiterating that the permit for banners for the “Trust Women Silver Banner Campaign” was issued in violation of the city code. LLDF’s Legal Director, Catherine Short, again requests that the banners be removed.

Real Estate 4 Life

Advance Medical Directives

Testimonials

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.

Nam liber tempor cum soluta nobis eleifend option congue nihil imperdiet doming id quod mazim placerat facer possim assum. Typi non habent claritatem insitam; est usus legentis in iis qui facit eorum claritatem. Investigationes demonstraverunt lectores legere me lius quod ii legunt saepius. Claritas est etiam processus dynamicus, qui sequitur mutationem consuetudium lectorum. Mirum est notare quam littera gothica, quam nunc putamus parum claram, anteposuerit litterarum formas humanitatis per seacula quarta decima et quinta decima. Eodem modo typi, qui nunc nobis videntur parum clari, fiant sollemnes in futurum.

Freedom of Access to Clinics