This broadcaster has 543 podcast archives available on-demand.
Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.
May 17, 2021 1:00 pm
Breaking news the Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could limit the impact only versus Wayne live from Washington DC Supreme Court moments ago. They have agreed to hear a major abortion case, the justices will take up Mississippi's bid to revive a ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Phone lines are open for your questions right now.
Call 1-800-684-3110 state lawmakers passed the band three years ago in 2018 with the lower court then blocked the move siding Supreme Court precedent, the court will hear the case. Next term, and now chief counsel for the American Center for Justice Jay Sekulow broadcast.
This is a breaking news and big news report to hear the first major abortion case since the new Supreme Court. I call it the Roberts to Supreme Court. This is with the addition of new courses, but Cavanaugh, Amy, Garrett, so you got a expanded conservative block at the Supreme Court of the United States. You have a case coming out of Mississippi where Mississippi passed a law that basically, in essence said after 15 weeks of the baby's life. Unborn child's life that abortions would be prohibited except the case life of the mother medical emergency and fetal abnormality. Now, what's interesting about this and we point this out in the brief that we filed in support of this and that is this is really to be a question of whether the stare decisis that is Roe versus Wade is still the framework upon which these cases should be reviewed and he stare decisis is only as good until this report says is not good anymore. That's right stare decisis. Of course we know is a concept that says the cases that have been decided in a certain way based on certain facts and certain law should be decided the same way again and again of where per our position is correct, there will be. I was wrongly decided in the Casey case was wrongly decided. Stare decisis should not prevent the Supreme Court of the United States from following the law that was enacted in Mississippi. It should not that the Constitution should always trump started to sizes. In other words, what the Constitution says should always take precedence over what these man-made legal principles say CC how senior counsel for the ACLJ is with us also and CC give me your assessment of the significance is a big case got big ramifications lectures, assessment of the significance here because the court now has said a state's interest becomes compelling to protect the life of the baby despite an arbitrary point of viability said this case is going to decide if the estate can say that there to protect our baby before viability and in this case. At 15 weeks you. It's interesting here. Harry is from a policy standpoint. The dates aren't. The timeframe is moving back this is kind of the left great fear is that the medical science immediately.
The growing surgeries on the children in utero so the medical science is outpacing the pro-abortionist desire to push the envelope absolutely and snow in some respects the pro-abortionist have been caught in the trap of their own making.
They have suggested that abortion should be allowable up until the age of viability with the age of viability is now coming down quite sharply so that should mean that states should be allowed to impose restrictions on abortion to protect the life of the mother of the health of the fetus and to protect humane treatment of human beings. And I think if you look at the facts in this particular case. The facts in this case, support the state of Mississippi were to get into this in great detail whatsoever. Senior counsel wrote a brief. We filed a brief in this case because of your support of the ACLJ, of course, we filing a merits brief, as a ghost of the Supreme Court United States what's called a merits argument granted service rights. If you're just going is now Supreme Court has granted review in the most significant abortion related case in at least a decade. As far as the possibility in dealing with Roe versus Wade. Walter Weber's take on this will get a panel take on what this means will take your calls at 800-684-3110. Also, don't forget support the work of the ACLJ we come back 10 minutes and talk about title X funding your taxpayer dollars going to where abortion thought about that.
Two 1-800-684-3110 viewing documents back and the challenges facing Americans are substantial time when our Valley freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack is more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now.
ACLJ has been on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. Here's the bottom line we could not do our work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms than remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member.
Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us.
ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life changing work, become a member today ACLJ only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice as tech. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission life will show you how you are personally pro-life support and publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the and what Obama care means to the pro-life discover the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to question your free copy of mission life today online ACLJ/Supreme Court United States is granted certiorari to major case involving the constitutionality of an abortion may well implicate Roe versus Wade will be jointly Walter Weber, senior counsel for the ACLJ was the primary architect of our brief in just a moment. But before we do that is not the only abortion related news that's going on we go to Washington DC in her office. There fan Bennett or Dir. of governmental affairs title X up front and center.
Then what's happening on that front your courses if you come down on the same day. J this is an issue. This can be very familiar to our listeners title X funding, but this is one of those programs that Congress got it right when they wrote the statute. The statute that is supposed to provide for family planning program to says that none of the funds appropriated under this title shall be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning very plain J following the law would be very clear that entities like Planned Parenthood.
Another abortion provider should not be eligible for this funding. However, under the Obama administration. Planned Parenthood got an average of about $60 million. Under this program, Pres. front administration righted that wrong. They correctly apply the statute. Make sure that abortion providers did not have access to these funds of the Biden administration is set to change that back J today actually and in a matter of just a couple of hours.
Here we will be filing legal comments get this J on behalf of 557,000 of our members articulating what the law says in articulating what the Biden meditation must do time. I want to underpin the folks at your listening anywhere in the country. If you're on Facebook or YouTube or rumble or listening to the thousand radio stations on Sirius XM whatever platform ACLJ.org right now share this with your friends because I want to talk about impact the moment and have fan repeat that number because you're talking about a breathtaking amount of people responding. Risa fan. We say that again with following following comments. I'm actually holding a copy those comments right here beyond watching us on a television or social media platform you see it there they are. These are comments that are going in today on behalf of an 557,000 ACLJ members. More than half a million J man, what you think about stadium and stadium and stadiums full of people that responded on this so you think you from all my sets up immobilizing that action don't ignore half a million people on an issue like this so your voices could be heard.
Believe me, it will be hurt what Weber senior counsel for the ACLJ. The case is called Dobbs versus Jackson's women's health of the petition for certiorari is granted a limited to the first question which is restrictions on pre-viability whether all the pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.
Interpersonal. The significance of the case abortion case for the current plate of Supreme Court. We know the position of a number of who voted and spoken out on an issue before but we have several to have not yet weighed in and were hoping obviously that they would follow the Constitution rather than the distortions of the Constitution that we've seen in the past over the abortion issue that we talked about this and am neglecting 80%.*A decisive so let's first and he define her audience. What that means legally. I started to sciences is a judicial made concept that the court made concept and it what it says from English law did today is that cases that are based on the same facts in the same law should be decided in the same way that is not that is a a principle of law that is been filed and followed since the English common law was adopted in the United States. Cases that come up with at the same facts in the same law should be decided in the same way and that gives stability to the line. It gives us the ability to predict what's going to happen in the laws, not all over the place, but that doesn't trump the Constitution.
The Constitution of the United States first evolved, says life, liberty okay and those are the kinds of things that we are looking at that, the Roe V Wade and the Casey case should not trump the constitutional prohibition against the taking of life in the fashion that these abortion cases I have permitted up to now.
Walter, do you think of this. The framework of Roe versus Wade will be at issue here because a pathbreaking case, the prohibition on aborting goes after 15 weeks of testing, the consensus is that viability starts at approximately 20 to 22 weeks of gestation. Depending on how you measure it, so were talking about 5 to 7 weeks before the baby would survive outside the womb baby there obviously heavily developed but it be before the cutoff of viability for the Supreme Court were to say the viability to hard and fast line and you can't be an abortion.
Before that, as lower courts have ruled in this case. In other cases, then that's the end of the statute, they would have to modify Roe versus Wade or reinterpret its provisions in order to beautiful this law criticism CCU versus Wade is not really a constitutional standard.
Justice Blackmun's opinion, there has been criticized very significantly, including by members of the current Supreme Court of the United States were talking about what's deemed to be pre-viability that is at 15 weeks but will we have to also underscore him and Walter just touched on. This is regardless were talking about a human being.
Yes that's right about, and the Supreme Court has repeated and they said that the state's legitimate interest in protecting the life of the baby from pregnancy selling.
Now the Supreme Court has admitted that life the baby should be protected but were waiting on what is compelling to become a compelling interest and that was just arbitrarily sat at my ability. Justice O'Connor stated at one time that potential life is nevertheless potential first weeks.
That is, after viability, so we are talking about a baby potential life needs to be protected and Roe versus Wade. Much like you said it's legal scholars and justices both have said it's just poorly written and so we need to go back to what the Constitution states there is no right to abortion.
The Constitution and hopefully this case is going to bring that issue at the forefront. There should be a lot of pressure on the court when it comes to fighting for center premeeting a flood of briefs, so you must uphold Roe versus Wade. You must uphold Roe versus Wade. But Roe versus Wade has been significantly criticized constitutionally by academics, absolutely. So essentially the United States Supreme Court created a rule out of whole cloth. There is no constitutional foundation, at least in my opinion for Roby Wade and so even some distinguished scholars on the left have criticized the Supreme Court's decision making in that particular case. But if you focus solely on the issue of viability, then the case ought to come down on this single question, what does the science say about viability now. Importantly, we should note that pro-abortionist. They believe in the science and they believe in the law quite strongly only when it supports their position. Now the science is basically reducing the age of viability quite clearly and the state of Mississippi can marshal a strong scientific case in support of its's abortion restrictions and so one particular point that they make in their brief is that any surgical abortion taking place after 15 weeks gestation carries inherent medical threats to the mother, the risk of a mother's death from abortion at 16 to 20 weeks gestation is 35 times more likely than at eight weeks and the relative risk of mortality increases by 38% for each additional week at higher gestation that so I think if we are really concerned about life and if we are really concerned about the life of the mother. There is a clear and unmistakable statutory basis, scientific basis, which supports the Mississippi law. Walter, how would you define a victory here.
What does the wind look like anything the back of the music is a myth in the back of that either reversed or vacated would be a victory.
At this point that the lower court basically taking it down. What I would love to see is for the court to make some versus Wade had so many problems with it and and I would love for them to recognize as an institution. Some of those, like for example the way that babies are treated in abortion we would never treat animals and cruelty to animals statute with the been the kind caring limbs off poisoning right so suffocation getting an ejection killer would never ever considered that would draw the fact we do that the human being and act like a human right to make a lot of sense in a country that that that is founded on the ideas you know the Declaration of Independence and human rights in and the quality of the ACLJ architect of our brief that is now been granted.
Review the case of the grantor review. We have a lot more on this particular cost to how big of an issue is a life issue 41 800-684-3110 about elections having consequences. Now you got a new Supreme Court. This is the big test. A big test for that Supreme Court wouldn't talk about that we come back from the break Baltimore this title X situation, 1-800-684-3110 if you want to talk to us on air born support the work of the ACLJ but ACLJ.org that's how we do it so we file these briefs as I would breathe broadcast each and every day. Again ACLJ.org if you want tacos 800-684-3110 back with more just a moment, only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive.
And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn, called mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership is empowering the right question for mission life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans for substantial time and are now free to sort constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights and courts in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you, are not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing work, become a member today ACLJ date is granted review and I think the most significant abortion related case Roe versus Wade type of case may be in our lifetime because you have a new Supreme Court a different Supreme Court Supreme Court decision.
That's probably good to come down to two justices were such an Cavanaugh that's my that's any kind of our speculation, but we we don't know where corsets and Cavanaugh are on these issues. Yet we know their judicial philosophy. But then you play a key role here because I think Thomas Alito call me Barrett. I think you will know just as Barrett's judicial boss membership but she follows a Scalia type models fibers expect that she would say this frameworks no good, but the other two. We don't know yet. Yeah, I really find out find out very soon.
I think that one of the true conservative on the court. In my opinion of all conservatives. The true conservative on the court's Clarence Thomas, yes I Alito right with the name and Alito.
But Justice Thomas impresses me and is always impressed me so very, very much as being a follower of the Constitution and the textualism we know what his position on the jazz, the other to the other two though we don't have financing just easy when you look at the case a minute when they are going to come back with a minute and and what percentage can be a pilot. We still bother the mother said that his pile on this and there is a this is a pre-viability case.
Thus, this is ridiculous. It's not post by Billy wears a different issuer that the standards of review are different. This is pre-viability bats with the parole board to us are going to be arguing still remain.
Liability point is an arbitrary point that the court when state interest in protecting the health and life. The mother and the baby becomes compelling said that's really I think what's at issue is honestly like to sister Connor said potential life is no less potential in the first few weeks that it is after viability and so if we truly believe that the state has a compelling interest to protect the life and health of the mother and the baby, then we need to take a very good luck at Winamp against course is before viability can feel pain. The baby is fully really basically on at 15 weeks and can sense things outside the window so there is a point where in the state obviously can't protect the health and life of the mother and the baby. Clearly that needs to be determined before viability, particular phone calls of 864 3110, 1-800-684-3110 is good at Christmas, from Nevada is only two hi Chris, welcome the broadcaster on their I thank you baby can't take care of itself. Whether that one week or nine months. Can you please define viability for me with the way the court is defined viability is that based on medical science could the child survive outside the womb cc that's the definite that's kind of been the legal definition of a medical term of art and the viability.
Generally, people are saying doctors will say is around 20 or 22 weeks. That's right have been born early on and have survived so basically viability is there able to breathe and land. Honestly, some have to take care of them just like color stated for almost the first 12 years of their life at parents need to care their children. But it's when the baby can actually survive outside so I question this though Harry and that is is that even the proper standard if we believe that the life of the unborn child is a life from the moment of conception and a law as written, it says okay locate you got life of the mother at risk.
Those kind of things. That's one thing but if not, does the value of that human life change by the week.
No, I think the court is that it does. But I mean present really good policy. Probably not.
So I think the key quintessential issue is the following does the state have a compelling interest in protecting the life and the health of both the mother and the fetus and I think if we follow the science and if we follow our belief in protecting human life. The answer I think is clearly yes and so here the state of Mississippi is prepared to take affirmative steps to protect both the mother's life and the life of the child, and I think you cannot deny the states interest in doing that. I think the abortionists, the people that clearly support abortion. They are prepared to allow abortion to take place after the child is indeed born alive and so if you go back to the memorable words of Gov. Northam in Virginia, you allow the child to be born. You make the child comfortable and then you decide whether or not the child is entitled to live clearly beyond question. At that particular point, no one ought to be willing to deny the right of that child to live, but progressives do not generally speaking, believe in life. They believe in the notion of progress and if you go back and you look at the history of the eugenics movement in the United States verges on a form of genocide, which was aimed at shrinking the population of so-called unfit and unemployable individuals. And I think the Mississippi law stands in stark contrast to that moved by progressive, you know, Gov. Northam's comments and inure shaking your head I remember is so reprehensible but yet so typical of those that are in favor of an unrestricted right will yeah follow the signs until it doesn't follow the left narrative. Someone said on YouTube and our producer really gave us a lot.
Remember that Northam made those statements otherwise have the child make it comfortable and then decide whether it's outside the woman it's there, a living breathing real human being, and then decide. Let's be real candid J whether to kill it or not, that's exactly what that is. None. That's what's known as an is always been known as infanticide and he made those statements know it's it's some it's heart wrenching. I want to go to up to Washington DC again because, as we close this first half-hour.
Let's talk about this title X abortion issue. So what is going to happen here and what can be done for and what's that what's what's the situation he had abide administration J has filed this rule and if it goes into full effect it would, again, I'll make these funds available to Planned Parenthood for abortion services. It is that common shell game that they play an accounting game where they would use it directly for abortion but would free up their own dollars for a J we are filing those comments on to say this again, on behalf of more than half a million ACLJ members opposing it and look I don't have any great confidence that the Biden administration is gonna do the right thing.
But here's why we do it anyway. J those 557,000 members. They're not going anywhere to continue to speak their gonna continue to advocate and they're getting continue to vote. So while while there may be some setbacks in the short-term, J. This has always been the long game for us and in the end.
J after we play the long game were to win on this one. In the end I'll make a what's coming up for to get in-depth and more in this way. Take your phone calls as well just been holding will get to him and others are phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. The largest pro-life case to be taken by the Supreme Court, especially with this, Newport, including the viability of Roe versus Wade as a constitutional precedent ready to get into all of that you want to stay tuned. If you're watching this on any of our social media platform occurs during the speed with your friends. It's very important state aid.
Follow us on Facebook twitter every other Instagram, YouTube very important for you to stay engaged also support the work of ACLJ hunting comments going to pay for half a million people.
ACLJ.R will be back later called Xander 684-3110 in just a moment.
For decades ACLJ's been on the frontline protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member. Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ live from Washington DC and Justice Jay Sekulow because were about to have a major case involving abortion. A major case involving frankly the viability of the important job of the viability of the framework authorized under Roe versus Wade. I think all that said is you're that earlier in the broadcast. But if you're just joining us, the Supreme Court is taking Dobbs versus Jackson's women health organization limited to the first question presented, which is whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional. Now cc house, a senior counsel for the ACLJ she's involved a lot of these lipases. The pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions that were at issue here. The lower courts is said to constitute an unconstitutional undue burden on the women's right to abortion because like he said they are trying to follow around the way back to follow their court decisions and throughout the history of rotate the right way, the court has said that the state absolutely has an interest legitimate interest in protecting the health and life and the mother and the baby. What where were at this point is when interest become compelling and right now the court has just arbitrarily set backs at viability. But we can see that that's not true before viability, the state has a compelling interest to protect the health and life of the mother and the baby that abortion is getting riskier from another as they as you wait longer. Said that's very much a compelling interest. Of course the baby 15 weeks, which is what we're talking about here.
This statute has said no abortions after 15 weeks on 15 weeks the baby is developed, it can feel pain. It can respond to stimulus outside the mother's when so there very much is a compelling interest for the states to protect the life of the mother and the baby well before viability would be very interesting call coming in from Brent in Tennessee his OB/GYN Brent, go ahead. You're on the air with the broadcast, good morning. Thank you for taking the culture, what we what we don't see in this debate is proper you the viability in terms of ending a pregnancy that is that there are actually two different ways that viability is the term viability is used in regard wanted the diagnostic effect on whether or not the child is alive and the other prognostic effect of whether or not the child has continued survival. It we diagnostic effect of whether or not like there early at Berkeley when you can see a heartbeat a you thing the prognostic effect of whether or not the child has a chance of survival if delivered was wrong when I first started to use it and it wrong that were going to have to get a state legislature somewhere to keep bringing back train of thought into the lead to correct things I want to say here is to be maybe a little bit of controversy.
Obama say because I believe in litigating this case for 40 years. You know I think about starting to sigh six when it's wrong. Overturn it to the list of cases, to when the internment of Japanese Americans. Okay, how about Plessy versus Ferguson money I give you a list of cases starting this Isis is not a constitutional mandate. Andy know it is not.
It is a judicial construct.
It's made up by the law by the judiciary in order to establish some stability but if it's wrong to begin with and unconstitutional to begin with.*Decide who should never stand as an impediment to doing what the Constitution says, or prohibiting what the Constitution prohibits that's exactly where are Betsy ACLJ's position on this has been by the way, for three decades. I we come back will take your calls.
800-684-3110, one 800-6431 10. Don't forget support the work of the ACLJ affair. Those comments are going in today correct yeah just a matter of a couple of hours. Your J 550,000 you join with us on sitting 550,000 you. I will say thank you challenges facing Americans for substantial time and are now free to sort constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontline protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms that remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you. Not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing, member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable voice is. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn, called dish will show you how you are personally patient includes all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood. What Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership is powering the right question mission life today online/abortion, coupled with cold abortion Inc. it's available ACLJ films.com and I would encourage you to listen to the two minute clip. This is really important.
It really sets forth what were concerned with hearing from people that were involved in abortion business and abortions themselves. I want you to listen to this now share this with different make sure your sharing this be with your friends because were watching on any of our social media platforms are ACLJ.org run television. This is something you should see. Take a look background is pre-matched bench seating around three. While there were about nine I think are out there and aerosol drop curtain changing ramp went down there crying. I still remember lying on the steel: table staring them in a bright light counting backwards from 10 challenges came and explain what he detailing right and Dr. just sat at the end of the table where any very pain like that in my life really member them talking to me at all during the major remember the nurse getting this today Shannon I just kept rubbing my arm shushing me and I remember looking around and seen waking up mouse.
They just stood me up) forever.
Betty got a draft. I ran and then gave me a glass of water and send and send me on the door when I stood in addition to these didn't work and I think payment because of the I realized that I was missing a large part of and it was too much for me to take my estate. I was an American Center for Law and Justice have been dedicated to the fight for life over three decades. We want you to be there with us ACLJ.org right now ACLJ.org just say what I was playing with the justices states could see that you hear from the women that are involved in this these artificial constructs of viability and pre-viability in the three traumatic three.
It's basically three prong analysis of trimesters and break it up into three sections 1 through 3336629S of this report is as is done this in reverse right Roe versus Wade is bad law by me. All that means is that the states to sigh with the abortion laws are, but to have this federal right now. Joe binds already tweeting out and Elizabeth Morris tweeted out she tweeted this, the large majority American support Roe versus Wade.
This can be up to the Supreme Court. Congress can must pass a law to protect the right to a safe and legal abortion. No matter what trumps justices say you know what that you know exactly Harry what they are gunning for right there. Absolutely. So essentially they are attempting or they're prepared to attend to overwhelm the Supreme Court to overwhelm the Constitution and to overwhelm federalism. So I think at the end of the day. Chuck Schumer, the Senate Majority Leader was right but Democrats are intent on one thing and one thing only changing America permanently and I would say they are planning to change America permanently for the worse and it is time for the American people to react to these moves by Democrats. We are taking your phone calls at 800-684-3110 also taking your comments in by Facebook and YouTube to encourage you get those, and let's go to Jeff was going on line 3 in California if you want to talk to us at 2000 684-3110 Jeff like author so if there is a positive pro-life decision ultimately will not certainly move the by administration forward in packing the court.
Also, when your call came in.
This is a very interesting question. What will it will use any excuse they can any decision on any topic, especially abortion.
I think you're right to see if they can muster up the support for this would take what we call court packing with Scott at justices and getting up to 15 everything is there any doubt that they will use any decision such as pro-life decisions, but that when Rick rings the emotion you no doubt J they absolutely will. But here's what I would predict. I predict that if they do, that the American people will see right through it. The American people will see through the effort and they will rise up and and and and these people won't have power anymore Jake, I want to insert this as well. This is about United States catching up with the rest of the civilized world.
This is going to shock some people. There are only five countries in the world that do not have some sort of recognition that align needs to be drawn somewhere and recognize that the legal rights of that child, Jake. The United States is one of those five.
Here are three of the other nations on that list.
North Korea, Vietnam and China is that the list that the United States is can remain on or we're going to recognize with the rest of the world already has that we have to catch up with the legal rights of these unborn have. I'm with you hundred percent but we remember something the left was a great question from Jeff because what's the looking to do.
Let me tell you how aggressive they are. Remember this from the steps of the Supreme Court of United States of the Planned Parenthood rally with the now majority leader of the United States Senate. Take a listen to Chuck Schumer. I wanted to, you know you will make faces it's like to think about this for a moment. Yeah, I mean you know judges accuse me of making fix this in court all the time and I can't help but wonder that when I hear United States Sen. now the Majority Leader of the Senate threatened a Supreme Court justice. Two of them goes. Justices Cavanaugh and Gore surgeon telling them you release the whirlwind and you're going to pay the price.
In other words, were going to come after you were going to say that if you're not up for elections was that liquid is only one what you can do it and that's eliminate them and you can't run against him.
Okay, you won't know what hit you when I when I hear that I know what that means, that means violence and if you go forward with these awful decisions will this decision is now before them. Dobbs versus Jackson women's health. The decision is there, Chuck Schumer, what are you going to do well with the doing differently to do right now is to codify all of this but you see she had thought about that codifying it. We believe that life is protected under the Constitution to codify all day and all night, but that that statute would not necessarily be constitutional units, it will put Roberts right into a statutory law, but if the Constitution protects the life of the unborn child doesn't matter if a statute, the Constitution takes precedent over the statute, talking about previous court decisions the Constitution takes precedence over laws that are not constitutional over decisions.
Previous court decisions that are not constitutional. We discussed this Roe versus Wade is not does not go along with Constitution. There is no right to abortion to be found in the Constitution and legal scholars and justices anything more legal scholars that have gone after Roe V Wade is back it is a bad decision and so this is a chance for the Supreme Court to get it right. Chuck Schumer doesn't get to say about what I want you to vote for or you're out. She needs to be saying you follow the Constitution. That's what a Supreme Court justice does and if they follow the Constitution life will be protected. Never say that it's not becoming the words of Chuck Schumer's mouth nor his constituencies.
Now then, the question on court will they use.
If there is a positive decision only put the cart before the horse, because who knows what can happen were to file brief will see what happens. But would that use it as a court packing tool forced labor, but they can use anything as a quarterback until they absolutely would. The evidence of that J is that the bill in the house to pack the court is actually cosponsored by the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Jerrold Nadler, that does not happen unless they're committed to jail tell you. Here's what here's why they're so panicked on this particular issue because they're losing this viability question goes back to a conversation you had a toddler is clearly not viable self-reliant with outside support so that can't possibly be the standard. They know they're losing it. They're getting desperate, I think, no I think here that's exactly right mean an end.
They've got the submit test of the Supreme Court, but they now see minutes click clearly be before the court.
I think that's absolutely correct, and it's clearly before the American people. The American people have seen the ultrasound pictures so the viability has already been established in the minds of most American people well before 22 weeks. We had a physician on earlier who talked about a viable heartbeat at five weeks so I think the evidence is clear, I think the Democrats are losing an appeal with respect to the American people because the American people see the evidence.
I think that's exactly correct.
It exactly right. All right blessing the broadcast taker called Duffy folding 1-800-684-3110. That's 800-684-3110 talk about this topic and raise other questions as well. 800-684-3110 also get your comments in on Facebook, that's fine too and we have a statement that we can plainly come back from Kentucky on this very issue that were staying around top of the production people information that is breaking 100-684-3110 support the work of ACLJ and ACLJ.is there any hope what Obama care means many ways your membership is powering the right question mission life today online/challenges facing Americans is freedom.
Constitutional rights are under attack the American Center for Law and Justice on the front lines projecting your freedoms and rights in court in Congress and in the public exceptional track record of success. Here's the bottom line we could not do our work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms that remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you.
Well, this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.you can learn more about her life changing, member today ACLJ take your call right to oppose 1-800-684-3110 also take some comments and by Facebook and YouTube.
Let's go to Steve's call you and you call 91 are two very stable edge on their caller quality earlier. The important thing is just another attempt by the Democrat controlled the people to do whatever is right in their eyes to get the votes to our next goal is a power grab. It's always been that way and unfortunately their power base is always been the inner cities were these abortion clinics can thrive and make it seem like it's a good thing for the people, whether just doing good spirits. Genocide is wrong. I don't understand why people in this country just can't see that the reason that people can't see it, Harry, is that there's been a 50 year policy and law versus Wade goes back to 1973 that makes it sound like it's a constitutional right absolutely so there are couple of issues. First, I think the Supreme Court in Roby Wade Miss red the Constitution, then the Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood B Casey decided some 20 years later. They again Miss red the Constitution and so I think you have that on one side. On the other hand, the American people are continually being confronted with actual evidence on the question of viability on the evidence that there is indeed a heartbeat.
With respect to a five week old child that answer the question, it should answer the question. There's a heartbeat except stop the progressives and the pro-abortion people. They believe in the science, as I said before, but only when it supports their preferences and so at the end of the day. This is not about the Constitution from the perspective of the left side. It's about their own preferences and redefine the autonomy interests of their constituents EC. I think that this is a false narrative created by Roe versus Wade. At that false narrative was and is that there's a sweep look at these things and trimesters and while the fetal life is more valuable the further along it gets.
But is the good doctor that called and said five days as a heartbeat. Should that be the test.
Note the test to be once the child is conceived that the child but the harpy I think would answer the question should have a pregnancy. So what like the doctor was arguing okay for talking out viability Bible pregnancy child like O'Connor stated Jessica Connor stated life doesn't get any greater after what the court has been viability 22 weeks when the baby is first conceived potential for life isn't fair.
From the point of conception is so absolutely heartbeat. We know that that baby is viable.
Absolutely it should be protected from that point because my viability should not be defined as viability outside the womb because as you said until 12 years old and not viable.
Let's be realistic, bad kids, okay right and sometimes longer than that, but so it that's a false narrative. It's a false test from the beginning was the wrong test reversals walk right.
Wade was wrong when it was decided if federalized estate issue put in a false narrative as to these dates and it basically made up a law out of whole cloth. I shouting everything just said because that is exactly right. It was created. Roby Lane was a conditionally created a right to abortion. There is nine in the Constitution. Life is protected by the Constitution and sell injustices that will follow the Constitution believed by senators or anyone else, but they will be true to what their position is and follow the Constitution and protect life, let me play which Inzaghi dispersed motion for the President just said because this tells you the nature. This might today be here in Mississippi is ministration believe that the court upheld the law.
Well, I don't have a comment specific to the Supreme Court taking the case that generally speaking, this is a state law, I can say that over the last four years at critical rights like the right to healthcare the right to choose have been under withering and extreme attack including Connie and state laws and the President and the vice President devoted to ensuring that every American has access to healthcare, including reproductive health care regardless of their income ZIP Code race health insurance status or immigration status.
As such, the President is committed to codifying row regardless of the unrelated outs are related to the outcome of this case, regardless of immigration status you pay for taxpayer dollars for abortion people that are in the states illegally to yes of course everybody come one come all were here to do it. You know the states have the right to make these decisions in my opinion, just this.
It's left of the states in Mississippi's House Bill 1510 had some very smart and rather reasonable scientific evidence to support it didn't just pull that out of whole cloth. And when she says draconian state laws. I read House Bill 1510 of the Mississippi legislature and it's not draconian, it makes sense. The reasoning behind the law is one that are inherent medical threats to the mother and abortions less than eight weeks gestation to sign supports the fact that the pre-born child has a conscious awareness of pain.
At 14 to 20 weeks gestation and three. The act regulates inhumane procedures even beyond the stage where the humanity of the pre-born child is undeniable. What is draconian about that reasonings because it makes sense because it goes against the entire nevertheless go to Jen con from Colorado let's call the day gender on their normal for crying and I hear it normal for them only one topic that this was an unusual one because it bounced up and back to the Supreme Court a lot. It was often backing up and back at this recording conference and out of conference and back in, they think 14 times a minute. I'm not helping him exaggerate. It was 10 to 14 times and finally they agreed to hear that you had a change of personnel that could be part of it. And yes, they're very picky on what cases they take really picky on what cases they take and in that context. You have to understand the nature of what were dealing with. Yes, they are picking what they take.
They do understand that that the issues are significant here and I think at the end of the day that this is a great opportunity for a new Supreme Court is a it's like the Roberts 2.0 court hearing. I mean it's it's the first got where they are on this. Absolutely. And the fact that the United States Supreme Court is so picky about taking cases. I think it increases the importance of this particular case and this particular decision Pete Williams from NBC news Bryn Mawr said, I think I counted last week. 17 times they discuss this case is what he said and that was the 18th one that was the bright ground that we have the actual sound of that.
But that is what he said so I think I thought it was working but now the site was 18.
You have we really filing a brief which means your support of the American Center for Law and Justice is critical. We get you this information on radio, TV, social media platforms. We also take action will be filing a brief on the merits. Mary filed one on the position for this writeback was granted. Now comes the merits, face the big base can be seen overturning of Roe versus Wade. Your support for the ACLJ makes a critical difference. Go to ACLJ.org and support the work of the ACLJ ACLJ.O are issues in Israel Burlington we may get some of that tomorrow will see what the news is that again support the work of the ACLJ United States around the ACLJ on the frontline protecting the rights in court in Congress and in the public arena.
The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member.
If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work become a member today ACLJ