Right to Life of Louisville, the driving force behind many KRLA events, has NEWS!

KRLA Forum

By

You may need to refresh this page for the latest view.

4D Ultrasound

yawning infant

Please join the KRLA Team by signing up! After logging in you will be able to post a comment.

PHOTO CREDITS: 4D Ultrasound of fetal yawning at 30 weeks of pregnancy by Dr. Wolfgang Moroder. Baby yawning by Jeuwre. Human fetus at 10 weeks.

10 week old fetus

fetus at 10 weeks

Learn about Kentucky’s Dismemberment Law.

KRLA Forum

new_laws_b.jpg

Second in a Series: Pro-life Laws Under Attack

The initial document filed March 14, 2019, by EMW’s attorneys states its case as a constitutional challenge to HB5, the Anti-eugenics Law. Then on March 15 the complaint was amended to include SB9, the Heartbeat Law, even before these had been signed into law by Gov. Bevin.

Both laws were viewed as unconstitutional by the Plaintiffs. The U.S. Constitution provides for a right to privacy in Amendment 14, and that is how Roe v. Wade was framed to permit abortion.

What does it mean to be a strict constitutionalist? On the surface, it sounds good, but the assault on the common values of the America that was once a Christian nation, has twisted our constitution so that now a judge can view the right to abortion as sacrosanct if it is performed prior to viability. And today the term Christian commonly includes pro-abortion church leaders and members.

The Heartbeat Law makes perfect sense to the pro-lifer who views the pre-born baby as a person with standing before the law. After all, in Kentucky we have laws to prosecute anyone who wantonly causes the death of an unborn child in a criminal manner. We recognize the fetus as a person.

But on the other hand, we uphold Roe v. Wade as the law of the land, and call abortion a woman’s right. We say it is constitutional based on the 14th amendment,
A person may choose to have an abortion until a fetus becomes viable, based on the right to privacy contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Viability means the ability to live outside the womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception.

So it is that the Plaintiffs have argued that both HB5 and SB9 are unconstitutional.

They won a Temporary Restraining Order in part based on this reasoning and could win the case at the District level as well.

We think our attorneys’ reasoning is much better. We will look at that in the next post.

VIABILITY OR PAIN?

This week the Plaintiffs filed a new document referencing the Alabama law to ban abortion (nearly totally) that a federal district court has blocked, stating:
Alabama’s abortion ban contravenes clear Supreme Court precedent. It violates the right of an individual to privacy, to make "choices central to personal dignity and autonomy." Casey, 505 U.S. at 851 (opinion of the Court). It diminishes "the capacity of women to act in society, and to make reproductive decisions." Id. at 860. It defies the United States Constitution.

The concept of viability, as already noted, is currently defined as "the ability to live outside the womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception." This definition has been disallowed by the Pain-capable rule that restricts abortion at 20 weeks of pregnancy when an unborn child can feel pain. Kentucky passed the Pain-capable Law in 2017.

As well, viability no longer is limited to 24 weeks; LifeNews reports on a baby born at 21 weeks, the youngest ever to survive, who is doing vey well now. The article states:
Research published in 2015 in the New England Journal of Medicine found that 23 percent of premature infants survive as early as 22 weeks of pregnancy, but some hospitals have policies against treating babies at this early age.

Many, if not most, pro-lifers and pro-life medical authorities believe that a fetus much younger than 20 weeks can feel pain. The legendary Silent Scream video of an ultrasound that shows an abortion of a 12-week fetus reveals the pre-born baby thrashing to avoid the abortionist’s instrument and a wide open mouth when she is struck.

The seamless process of fetal development is so wonderful and amazing. To think of its interruption for callous reasons or from ignorance is heart-breaking.

The construct of viability presumes the mother and child are at cross purposes. The infant must be able to fend for herself or himself to be worthy of protection against abortion. Yet, the "viable" child is hardly independent and neither is the mother. Both need lots of help.

"No man is an island … " (John Donne, 1572-1631) We are interdependent. The Supreme Court needs new perspectives.

This blog series will pick up after the November 5 General Election.


KRLA Forum
First in a Series: Pro-life Laws Under Attack

Whatever became of the Heartbeat (SB9) and Anti-eugenics (HB5) bills that became law last March? Will discovery be allowed for the state of Kentucky to defend these laws?

You may be asking, what is discovery in a legal context? Here is Dictionary.Law.com’s definition:
n. The entire efforts of a party to a lawsuit and his/her/its attorneys to obtain information before trial through demands for production of documents, depositions of parties and potential witnesses, written interrogatories (questions and answers written under oath), written requests for admissions of fact, examination of the scene and the petitions and motions employed to enforce discovery rights. The theory of broad rights of discovery is that all parties will go to trial with as much knowledge as possible and that neither party should be able to keep secrets from the other (except for constitutional protection against self-incrimination). Often much of the fight between the two sides in a suit takes place during the discovery period.

Why has discovery not been permitted so far? Here begins a brief blog series to examine the EMW Clinic legal case against these laws.

We will look at documents filed by our attorneys and EMW’s on the PACER website. PACER is the Public Access to Court Electronic Records website that lets anyone create a login and search for case information.

If discovery is permitted by the judge, it is sure to be enlightening, but we may be on the brink of an opposing conclusion. Nevertheless, assuming Gov. Bevin is re-elected, the case probably will be pursued to the Appeals Court.

MANY ATTORNEYS

Four law entities are pursuing the case to quash HB5 and SB9 on behalf of the EMW clinic:

  • The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, NY, NY
  • Ackerson & Yann, PLLC , Louisville, KY
  • ACLU of Kentucky Foundation, Louisville, KY
  • O’Melveny & Myers, NY, NY

Kentucky is defending this case with attorney services from the Office of the Governor and the Cabinet for Health and Human Services since our Attorney General refused to defend them.

The opposition has termed HB5 the Reason Ban and SB9 the 6-week Ban. They have lumped these together in their suit that initially sought both a temporary restraining order and/or a temporary injunction as well as a permanent injunction, and now requests a summary judgment— asking the judge to reject these laws as unconstitutional, to dismiss the suit, and to permanently enjoin the defendants (our state) from "enforcing, attempting to enforce, threatening to enforce, or otherwise requiring compliance with SB9 and HB5…". (Enjoin in a legal context means to order.) That means never again could these issues be revisited in any legislation our senators or representatives propose.

The Judge in charge of this case is David J. Hale. From the Ballotpedia website, we read: …President Barack Obama nominated Hale to fill a vacancy on the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky. Hale was confirmed to the court on December 3, 2014, by a voice vote of the Senate.


KRLA Forum

HB 5, AN ACT relating to the human rights of unborn children to not be discriminated against, has been reported favorably and noted on the Legislative Calendar. A Corrections Impact Statement has been filed. See here. More on the Impact statement is here.

HB 148 has been engrossed and passed to the Senate Public Protection Committee, and SB 227 (see below in blog) has been introduced and passed to that committee. “Engrossed” means a bill is in the process of discussion and voting, and its wording is subject to amendment.

A Resolution, HR 135, has been introduced in the House to condemn the passage of the “Reproductive Health Act” by the New York State Assembly. Take a moment to read it. Its points are clear. States can legislate to curtail the carnage in Roe v. Wade, and we can speak out. Thank you, Kentucky Pro-Life Caucus and others in our legislature who are determined to stand for Life.


KRLA Forum

The redesign of the KRLA website was published in December 2018 and reflects some new thinking. We are striving to include even more content in a way that is easier to navigate.

On the previous site we had a Forum with content relating to important topics. These are now are covered in this Blog. The Tags are our Blog categories.

To keep up with changes in web technology, we are using a "minimal" blog with a simple commenting system. To comment, please Signup and Login. The Login system requires that you check your email to verify your identity.

On our previous website it was necessary to create a login in order to comment or chat. On this site we encourage and urge you to Signup (create a login) so that we can alert you to key news and political action needs.

We continue to publish pro-life e-news twice monthly, and you will be added to our list when you Signup.



TWEETING @Kentucky RTL

Useful Links



Logically...

Kentucky Right to Life

Kentucky's largest and oldest right to life organization and the official state affiliate of the National Right to Life Committee

134 Breckinridge Lane
Louisville, KY 40207

(502) 895 5959
fax (502) 895 7028