Radio Recap – SCOTUS Rules Against Life | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

ACLJ Profile Completion


The Supreme Court ruled against life today.

On today’s Jay Sekulow Live, we discussed the Supreme Court’s latest ruling against life. Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding vote.

In yet another 5-4 Supreme Court decision, the Supreme Court struck down a law that was similar to a Texas law that the court struck down in 2016. There was a major flip in one of the justices. That was the Chief Justice. When the similar Texas law which was actually broader, came before the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Roberts had no problem siding with Texas and life as a dissenter.

The Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana law which required abortionists to have hospital admitting privileges within thirty miles of an abortion clinic.

In this case, you see something very different from Chief Justice Roberts as he had exactly the opposite opinion on the Texas law. This is not so shocking with him because of what happened with the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare). He did that same thing that he’s done in the past where the case itself, he didn’t agree with the reasons, however he agrees with the outcome so he made up his own way to get there.

The difference between their activist judges and our conservative judges is usually the activist judge already has in their mind where they are going to be in a ruling. They then just come up with a reason to get there. Conservative judges arrive at a decision by using reasoning process. In this case, he didn’t follow the reasoning; he followed the conclusion.

My dad, ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, made the following point:

I think this is the issue that we have to be very cognizant of. Chief Justice John Roberts three years ago said the law was constitutional, a law that was much broader than this particular law. This was a more narrowly tailored law. Four justices dissented. Then of course, you had the switch of justices. What happens here? Chief Justice Roberts says I don’t agree necessarily with the reasoning of the majority, but because of stare decisis I am going to stick with that opinion.

Now, if that was the case, Plessy v. Ferguson, which was “separate by equal,” would still be the law of the land. There are times when stare decisis, the courts realize things were wrong. Korematsu, where the internment of Japanese Americans in WWII, that case today would not be followed.

Chief Justice Roberts had an easy way to say I thought it was wrong then and I think it was wrong now, but he didn’t go that way.

ACLJ Senior Counsel Andy Ekonomou gave his analysis when he said:

That is very disappointing. Stare decisis simply means that cases have been decided one way the Supreme Court or any court should continue to follow precedent because it’s binding on a subject. Sometimes old decisions like Plessy v. Ferguson and Korematsu are wrong and you have to say they are wrong. You can’t rely on stare decisis, which is judicial precedent to say that they are right. Justice Roberts disappoints yet again by having the opportunity to do what he did in the Texas case in the Louisiana case. He didn’t do that. He joined with the majority and again disappoints, once again, those of us who are pro-life and believe in the sanctity of human life.

The full broadcast is complete with more discussion by our team of the recent Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a pro-life law in Louisiana.

Watch the full broadcast below.

Confirm Conservative Judges Now

Constitution  Signatures


Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.

Make this a monthly tax-deductible gift.

As we demand the Senate stop the delays from the Left and confirm conservative judicial nominees, we urgently need your support. Have your gift DOUBLED today. Have your gift doubled through our Matching Challenge.

Email Address is required.
First Name is required.
Last Name is required.
Credit Card Number is required.
Verification Code is required.
Expiration Month is required.
Expiration Year is required.
Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.
Encourage your friends to sign and donate by sharing this petition.
Latest in
Pro Life

Supreme Court Bungles Abortion Case

By Walter M. Weber1593531878295

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its ruling in the case of June Medical Services v. Russo . Splitting 5-4, the majority of Justices invalidated a Louisiana state requirement that abortionists have admitting privileges at a hospital. As we previously reported , the ACLJ had filed an...

read more

Planned Parenthood – Abortion. No Matter What.

By Olivia Summers1593435600000

“Care. No matter what.” Planned Parenthood's Logo Planned Parenthood works incredibly hard to live up to its slogan – that is, if you understand what it really means: “Abortion. No matter what.” As I told you nearly five years ago: Planned Parenthood is actively engaged in a war against babies. Its...

read more

Racist Nature of Planned Parenthood Exposed by Its Own Employees

By Olivia Summers1593033702438

We’ve been saying it for years – Planned Parenthood lies , was founded on racist and eugenic ideologies , targets African Americans , and is evil . Now, Planned Parenthood employees themselves are admitting to and calling out those same facts. On June 18, 2020, current and former staffers of...

read more

20,000 Il. Govt. Emails on Continuing Abortions During Pandemic

By Jordan Sekulow1593015781651

The Illinois Department of Public Health has just admitted to the ACLJ the existence of 20,008 emails about making sure abortions continue during the pandemic. The Illinois government, it would seem, has spent a lot of time worrying about everybody but the unborn. Here is the backstory. On April...

read more