Click to enlarge… This photo comes by an interesting route. Pro-choice author Robin Marty was in Chicago yesterday doing research for a story, and part of that process involved interviewing pro-life hero Joe Scheidler. Robin brought photographer Wendi Kent to take professional pictures to go with the story, and I was happy to see they posted one […]
by Kelli
The report details the 44 known audits or other reviews of Planned Parenthood affiliates’ financial data and practices, as well as 51 known audits of state family planning programs and three known audits of family planning organizations that found overbilling. The audits for fiscal year 2013 found a total of more than $115 million in waste, abuse, and potential fraud in federal and state family planning funding programs, the lion’s share of which goes to Planned Parenthood. Approximately $14.4 billion of federal Medicaid expenditures were improper payments, according to government sources.
The report also identifies 10 types of waste, abuse, and potential fraud Planned Parenthood affiliates have been found to be committing or have been credibly accused of nationwide.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous decision last week overturning Massachusetts’ 35-foot abortion clinic buffer zone law, which the court agreed unconstitutionally restricted the pro-life right to free speech, has implications far beyond similarly worded laws and ordinances around the country.
Read the background for this case here.
Today, in a unanimous ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Massachusetts’ buffer zone law, which banned pro-life advocates from entering a 35-foot restricted-speech zone around the entrance of abortion clinics. Read the decision here. Details, from USA Today:
The decision united Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s four liberals, who said the distance improperly removed demonstrators from public sidewalks and spaces. The other conservative justices would have issued a more sweeping verdict, striking down the ban on grounds that it targets abortion opponents’ specific point of view….
Although the court had upheld an 8-foot buffer zone in Colorado in 2000, the Massachusetts law passed in 2007 went 27 feet farther.
by Kelli Survivors of rape – whether their stories are told around the world or held close – face mixed reactions, ranging from support and empathy to victim-blaming. When a woman has a child resulting from rape, she may be fortunate enough to have family and friends who help her move forward in life. But […]
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
We cannot let the abortion-rights movement weasel away from the fact that although the National Abortion Federation did reject Gosnell’s membership application, that didn’t stop one of their member clinics from hiring him to work part-time at their facility. A woman who believed NAF’s promises of safety would make an appointment at this reputable clinic, which would collect her fee and then turn her over to Gosnell’s care. Her abortion would be started at the NAF clinic, after which the woman would be given an appointment to have her abortion completed at Gosnell’s own facility, where she would be drugged within inches of her life by people who didn’t even finish high school, then left to moan and writhe on a blood-stained recliner amid the cat feces.This relationship can’t be described as “outlier.” It was “employee.”
On April 29 a federal appellate court panel deemed it “preposterous” that the National Organization for Women would challenge an invoice submitted by pro-life activists for expenses incurred during a lawsuit brought against them by the pro-abortion feminist group that lasted almost 28 years.
The court ordered NOW to pay defendants Joe Scheidler, Pro-Life Action League, Timothy Murphy, and Andrew Scholberg $63,391.45 – a pittance, really - for costs to successfully defend themselves in the now infamous NOW v. Scheidler anti-trust lawsuit, launched in 1986.
During that time the case received an unprecedented three hearings before the U.S. Supreme Court, with the pro-lifers getting support in the form of amicus briefs from unlikely places, including PETA and Martin Sheen, since the issue was free speech.
Read the history of NOW v. Scheidler here. In a nutshell, quoting the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin:
by Kelli Inside Jackson Women’s Health Organization, there’s growing uncertainty over how much longer the doors will be open. Dr. Willie Parker flies in from Chicago to perform abortions at the clinic, one of two physicians who come to Mississippi to provide abortion care. Parker is a plaintiff in the lawsuit challenging Mississippi’s law. He’s […]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
