A Matter of Conscience | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

ACLJ Profile Completion

Verified

By Jay Sekulow1308975983000

As in any movement, the pro-life community has seen changes over the last decade.  In the 1980s and 90s, it was picketing and protests in front of abortion clinics that led the effort to eradicate the rampant abortions taking place in the United States.  These picketing and protests included acts of civil disobedience, pitting protestors against governmental authorities.  These protestors later faced arrests and, in some cases, allegations of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) violations.  It took 20 years to have those RICO charged lifted off the back of the pro-life movement.   In order to obtain victory, we actually had to take the RICO cases to the Supreme Court of the United States on three separate occasions.  Most recently, we won a unanimous decision, once and for all removing this cloud that had hung over the pro-life movement for two decades.

 

Now the front line fight for life includes doctors and medical professionals who refuse to participate in abortion procedures.  We have received calls across the country from medical professionals who were being compelled by their places of employment to participate in abortion procedures.  Nurses, doctors and pharmacists have all contacted us seeking help.  Weve gone to federal court in several of these cases and, in fact, have obtained a jury verdict, including punitive damages on behalf of nurses in California who were forced to dispense the morning after pill.  That victory sent shock waves through the pro-abortion industry. 

 

Our latest victory in federal court is doing exactly that once again:  A federal court has dismissed an attempt by Illinois Governor Blagojevich to dismiss a lawsuit against him filed by seven pharmacists whom we represent.  These seven pharmacists object to an Executive Order the Governor issued forcing all state pharmacists to dispense the morning after pill.  We have alleged in our complaint that the order violated the First Amendment right to religious freedom and freedom of conscience.  The U.S. District Court in Springfield, Illinois, denied the Governors motion to dismiss the suit, which was filed challenging the States year-old morning after pill mandate.  This is a significant victory for the right of conscience for those pharmacists who object to dispensing this particular pill.  Five of the seven pharmacists have actually lost their jobs for failing to comply with the Governors mandate.  In a 28-page order and opinion, Judge Jeanne Scott held that the pharmacists allegations taken as true may establish that the object of the Rule [morning-after-pill mandate] is to target pharmacists, such as the Plaintiffs, who have religious objections to Emergency Contraceptives, for the purpose of forcing them either to compromise their religious beliefs or leave the practice of pharmacy.  The judge went on to hold that such an object is not religiously neutral.  Rules and regulations that show hostility toward religious faith and practices are deemed unconstitutional by the courts.  The ruling is an important recognition of the right of conscience.  Frank Manion, who is leading these cases for us around the country, noted that, The Court has recognized that the State may not target religious objectors for disparate treatment.  Frank went on to state that [o]ur clients have never sought to prevent anyone from gaining access to these drugs.  They simply want the State to respect their right to refrain from participating in activity that violates their sincerely held beliefs.

 

Judge Scott, in her order, encouraged the State to amend its existing rule to clarify its object and application in a manner that would be consistent with individual constitutional rights.  We hope that the State of Illinois heeds the wisdom of Judge Scott.  If they do not, these cases will continue to be litigated as will others around the country.  As in the case of the jury trial for the nurses in California two years ago, this case is sending the same shock waves to the pro-abortion industry that is not used to having to have their position challenged so aggressively in federal court.  Its about time!

 

Latest in
Pro Life

Urging Supreme Court to Protect the Most Defenseless

By Walter M. Weber1542326760000

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the Supreme Court to review an abortion case out of Indiana. The case, Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK) , involves two provisions of Indiana law that were struck down by the lower...

read more

Piercing Big Abortion’s Shroud of Secrecy

By Erik Zimmerman1541777969588

We have recently joined a motion in an ongoing abortion industry lawsuit asking a federal court to require critical documents concerning Big Abortion’s sale of aborted babies’ body parts to be turned over. In 2015, the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) released a series of videos that showed senior...

read more

ACLJ Files Lawsuit to Protect Pro-Life Free Speech

By Michelle Terry1541170948318

Today the American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) filed a lawsuit in federal court in Iowa on behalf of two individuals, Anthony Miano and Nicholas Rolland, challenging a state statute that infringes upon their right to advocate for the lives of the unborn outside of Planned Parenthood and other...

read more

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Deals Blow to Big Abortion

By Olivia Summers1539956957514

Recently, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Louisiana law that “ requires abortion facilities to meet basic health and safety standards .” Specifically, the law requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. This is a victory for the lives of unborn babies,

read more