Packing Up CRT in partnership with Turning Point USA Faith at Evident Life Church 9/21 * 6:30pm
- Don’t forget to sign up to attend this impactful event at Evident Life Church. Link to the Registration form can be found on the church website.
- Packing up CRT with special guest speaker, Stephen Davis
- Learn how Critical Race Theory (CRT) is dangerous to our children and what we can do about it.
- We will also have a time of responding in prayer.
Federal Court Strikes Down Transgender and Abortion Medical Mandate
- A federal appeals court on Friday August 26th, 2022 struck down a Biden Administration statute that forced doctors to perform medical procedures, including gender transition procedures and abortions against their religious beliefs.
- The US Circuit of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit unanimously upheld a lower court’s ruling in Franciscan Alliance v. Becerra which protected around 19,000 health care professionals in Franciscan Alliance, a Catholic health care network, from performing medical procedures against their conscience.
- The lower court’s ruling had permanently prohibited the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “from requiring Franciscan Alliance to perform gender-transition surgeries or abortions in violation of its sincerely held religious beliefs.”
- This ruling is a major victory for conscience rights and compassionate medical care in America. Doctors cannot do their job and comply with the Hippocratic oath if the government requires them to perform harmful, irreversible procedures against their conscience and medical expertise.
- The mandate was first issued 6 years ago as part of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. This applied to “virtually every doctor nationwide”.
- Section 1557 of Obamacare prohibits health care programs from discriminating against patients on the basis of sex. In May 2016, HHS issued a rule interpreting Section 1557’s prohibition to include discrimination on the basis of “termination of pregnancy” and the disputed concept of “gender identity”.
- Franciscan Alliance claimed the 2016 rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by defining “sex discrimination” inconsistently with Title IX, which protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance.
- Franciscan Alliance also claimed that the 2016 rule violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) by forcing it to perform abortions and gender reassignment surgeries inconsistent with its sincerely held religious beliefs.
- The Biden administration and the ACLU were “dissatisfied with not being able to force religious health care providers to violate their faith” and appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
- The Biden administration has been accused of weaponizing Title IX to push “woke insanity” on Americans.
Tucson Judge Heard Arguments to Enforce an Abortion Law that Has Been Blocked for Nearly 50 Years
- The Attorney General’s office has requested to allow Arizona to enforce a near-total ban on abortions under a law that was blocked following the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v Wade decision that legalized abortion. The Supreme Court overturned Roe in June this year and returned Abortion Law decisions to the states where it belongs.
- The Arizona Law was first enacted decades before Arizona was granted statehood in 1912 and essentially prohibits abortions unless the mother’s life is in danger. This law was codified in our State Constitution in 1901.
- Attorney General Mark Brnovich wants prosecutors to be able to charge doctors who provide abortions unless the mother’s life is in danger and send doctors and abortion providers to jail with a two to five year prison sentence.
- The arguments were heard in Pima County Superior Court August 19th, 2022 given Pima County had issued an injunction against this constitutional law when the Roe v Wade decision was handed down in 1973. Assistant AG Beau Roysden said the judge’s role is simple: now that the high court overturned Roe v Wade, Pima County Superior Court Judge Kellie Johnson should lift the injunction preventing enforcement of the 1901 law codified in our Constitution. Planned Parenthood, on the other hand, is arguing that the proper way to deal with conflicting laws is to limit the reach of the old one, adding that a multitude of laws restricting and regulating abortion would be rendered meaningless if the court allowed the old law to be enforced without restrictions.
- Just this year, the legislature passed a law signed by Ducey that criminalizes performing abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which goes into effect Sept 24th. Roysden, however, noted that the 15-week law specifically says it does not create a right to abortion or mean that the pre-statehood law is unenforceable.
- While abortion providers in the state have since stopped all abortion related procedures (some may have started again) due to the complex legal landscape in the Grand Canyon State, Pro-Choice advocates attempted to put to vote whether the state should codify reproductive rights with a constitutional amendment in the state of Arizona on the November ballot.
- However, the abortion-rights supporters failed to collect the required 356,467 valid signatures by the July 7 deadline to get this on the November ballot.
- In preparation for the Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v Wade, the Tucson City Council voted June 7th to approve a resolution that gives women access to the full spectrum of healthcare, including abortion services. This resolution also directed the Tucson Police Department to revise its general order reflecting that no physical arrests can be made under the 1901 anti-abortion law.
- The court battle in Arizona is one of many playing out in Republican-led states across the country in the wake of the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruling. States with pre-Roe bans on the books are seeking to enforce them, while others that had “trigger” laws severely restricting or banning abortion if Roe were overturned want to enforce them.
- Pima Superior Court Judge Johnson said she would consider the arguments and issue a ruling after Sept 20th, a date determined by a procedural issue.