KRLA Forum

By

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

Attention All Right to Lifers!

Walk for Life

The 2020 Walk will be held on Saturday, September 12, starting from the Christian Academy Rockcreek Campus, 3110 Rockcreek Drive in St. Matthews, across from Seneca Park walking track. Learn more. Get involved!

Make a donation now!

4D Ultrasound

yawning infant

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.

Watch for news on the KRLA Facebook and Twitter pages!

KRLA Forum

Pro-lifers in Kentucky currently await a number of important court rulings:

  1. The Supreme Court will soon rule on the Louisiana June Medical Services case. Its decision could require abortion clinic doctors to have admitting privileges to a nearby hospital, leading to many clinic closings in the nation. In Louisville two doctors (of whom we are aware) at the EMW clinic do have hospital admitting privileges but this is not the same as a Transfer Agreement.
  2. The Transfer Agreement lawsuit awaits a decision from the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court. It is possible that the above-mentioned SCOTUS ruling will affect that case. However, as brought out by Kentucky’s attorneys during the trial and appeal, the critical aspect of such agreements is the “protocol for transferring medical records.” Since two of the judges on the Appeals panel were appointed by President Trump, we hope for a fair and just decision.
  3. The Heartbeat and Anti-eugenics laws, rolled into one during the litigation, await the decision of the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court on an Ohio case, “Preterm-Cleveland v. Himes,” that will determine the fate of Down Syndrome babies and the outcome of the Kentucky litigation.
  4. The Dismemberment Abortion law appeal was decided in favor of the EMW and ACLU,  however, AG Cameron will be making a decision soon on whether to request an “en banc” (full Appeals Court) hearing or to instead appeal the case to SCOTUS.

Presently, pro-lifers are striving to prevent the overturn of safety precautions for women who elect medical abortions. Attorney General Cameron has added Kentucky as an “Intervenor State” to an Amicus brief in defense of in-person dispensing of the “abortion pill” by a doctor for the protection of the woman seeking the abortion. The political association for ObGyns, ACOG, wants the FDA to drop their regulations that ensure a drug’s benefits outweigh its risks. The pro-life ObGyns have exposed this.

Let's all pray.


KRLA Forum

Governor Beshear used his Friday 5 PM briefing to veto SB 9.

The Courier-Journal reported online at about 6:30 PM, as well as in today’s print newspaper:

Gov. Andy Beshear has vetoed a bill that would hand new power to Attorney General Daniel Cameron to regulate abortion clinics and also require abortions be suspended as an elective procedure during the coronavirus pandemic.

Senate Bill 9 passed in the final hours of the 2020 General Assembly on April 15, also requires doctors to try to save any infant born alive, including after a failed abortion.

At this writing the veto has not yet been posted to the state website.

Reacting, Margie Montgomery expressed “extreme disappointment.” She and thousands of prolifers had politely but firmly sent emails and petitions to the governor pleading with him to uphold the measure either by letting it go into effect without his signature or courageously signing it.

Senator Whitney Westerfield, chief sponsor of SB 9, last week predicted Beshear would veto the bill. He said Friday night that he is “supremely disappointed” with the veto.

“This governor once again demonstrated his hostility to unborn life,” said Westerfield. “If the Lord is willing, I will file this bill on the first day of the 2021 session.”

Polls across America consistently show upwards of 80% of the public support Born Alive protections.

Interestingly, in his veto declaration, Beshear didn’t mention the merged aspect of the bill that provided Attorney General Daniel Cameron with authority to investigate the state’s two abortion clinics.

Cameron called on the Beshear administration earlier to end abortion procedures in the state during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a statement Friday night he called the veto “reprehensible.” Read the entire statement here.


KRLA Forum

A lot of information on Transfer Agreements is on this website, including a blog series that questions how Andy Beshear as AG filed an Amicus brief on behalf of EMW and PP. Particularly when it was his duty to defend Kentucky law. ?

Will our current AG Daniel Cameron sue Gov. Beshear for issuing the illegal license to abort?

It is well to pursue lawbreakers in a step-by-step manner as KRS 15.241 and HB451 prescribe. HB451 ended up in the House Rules Committee at the end of the 2020 Legislative Session, however its language was merged into the SB9 bill at the 11th hour of the Session. Many news stories today are reporting this advance.

Insert this!

hb451.png

For the AG to sue the Governor is a huge and costly step. AG Beshear sued Gov. Bevin five times and won two of the cases: He blocked the governor's $18 million cut to Kentucky universities in 2016 and blocked the administration's pension reform bill in 2018. Bevin won the teacher “sick-out” case, but when Beshear became Governor, he reversed the decision.

Most Kentuckians do not want their AG and Governor to be embroiled in court cases on different sides. Ouch. They would prefer the HB451 method.

Contingencies

Most pro-lifers would understand that the TA case may be decided at any time, and if it upholds Judge Stivers’ verdict, then the clinics will not need TAs.

Possibly the Appeals Court is waiting to learn if the Supreme Court will uphold Louisiana’s Unsafe Abortion Protection Act that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges within 30 miles of a local hospital, and requires doctors who perform more than five abortions a year to maintain proper licensing.

This case further mandates that informed consent protections and reporting of anonymous data and complications apply to to RU486 chemical abortions, just as to surgical abortion, and it clarifies that physicians in both private offices and licensed outpatient abortion facilities owe women the same informed consent protections and reporting of public health data and abortion complications, whether the abortion is surgical or an RU-486 drug-induced abortion.

Kentucky already requires reporting of RU486 abortions and informed consent protections, and does not permit abortions to be performed in private offices nor in public hospitals unless to save the life of the mother.

The tragedy of this long wait for court decisions is the loss of precious and innocent humans who deserved legal protection. So, don’t be surprised if AG Cameron decides to make an issue of the missing TAs as well as the COVID-19 violation of the Governor’s healthcare mandate even if SB9 does not become law. And, don’t be surprised if the Sixth Circuit Court decides in favor of Kentucky’s appeal before SCOTUS rules on the Louisiana case.

An Aside:

Current Kentucky abortion licensing requires that:
An employee or volunteer of the facility while afflicted with any infected wounds, boils, sores, or an acute respiratory infection or any other contagious disease or illness shall not work in any capacity in which there is a likelihood of that person transmitting disease to other individuals.

Since COVID19 carriers may be asymptomatic, this is yet another aspect of licensing law being broken.


KRLA Forum

In many previous posts we have carefully explained why it is not possible for any abortion clinic in Kentucky to be licensed unless it has Transfer Agreements. Nevertheless, the law that mandates this has been ignored.

For a time we were not sure that Planned Parenthood was doing abortions even though we knew they had been issued an illegal license, but we recently learned a person seeking an abortion had been scheduled there to have one. So, we are assuming that Kentucky now has two abortion clinics.

Though Gov. Beshear has mandated that all elective medical procedures cease, about 380 abortions have been performed this month at the EMW clinic. How many at PP? Who knows?

Attorney General Daniel Cameron is on the move to enforce protection for abortion clinic workers and their clients. But based on media reports of Planned Parenthood and ACLU-led push-back against this common sense initiative in other states, it is likely Cameron's challenge will be opposed.

We urge all pro-lifers to send a message to our AG to encourage him in this fight and to show appreciation. He has shown great leadership for us, and we need to show great support for him.

Based on former AG Beshear challenging Gov. Bevin in court, it was established by Kentucky’s Supreme Court that the AG can sue the Governor. The Court wrote:

“It is certainly in ‘the interest of all the people’ that there be no unconstitutional or illegal governmental conduct.” The Court analyzed the supremacy of the Attorney General as the chief law officer of the Commonwealth, and found that he has broad authority to sue for declaratory and injunctive relief against state actors, including the Governor, whose actions he believes are illegal or unconstitutional.

Though we do not look for AG Cameron to be ‘litigious’ we know he is committed to protect human life in all its stages.

Executive Director Margie Montgomery has weighed in on this controversy. Click to see the WLKY-TV report and video.

Our office staff is on the job throughout the week, though the public cannot enter our building at this time due to COVID-19 restrictions. Your contributions are most welcome, and we thank all who donate, no matter what the amount.


KRLA Forum
Attorney General Daniel Cameron | March 27, 2020 | Kentucky.gov

Statement from Attorney General Cameron Regarding the Continuation of Abortions During the COVID-19 State of Emergency

FRANKFORT, Ky. (March 27, 2020) — Attorney General Daniel Cameron today released the following statement regarding Kentucky’s abortion providers continuing to perform abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Today, I’m calling on CHFS Acting Secretary Eric Friedlander to certify, pursuant to KRS 15.241, that Kentucky’s abortion providers are violating his ban on elective medical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic by continuing to perform abortions. Kentucky’s current ban on elective medical procedures exists to further the mandated policy of social distancing and to help conserve medical resources for use in fighting COVID-19.

Acting Secretary Friedlander is on the front lines of fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, and I am confident that he understands, better than anyone, the necessity of ending abortion procedures during this health crisis. His certification will immediately trigger action by our office to stop elective procedures during the pandemic.

Abortion providers should join the thousands of other medical professionals across the state in ceasing elective procedures, unless the life of the mother is at risk, to protect the health of their patients and slow the spread of the coronavirus.

On March 14, Governor Beshear recommended that hospitals cease performing elective procedures. Subsequently, on March 23, Acting Secretary Friedlander ordered all “non-emergent, non-urgent in-person medical, surgical, dental, and any other healthcare practice or procedure” to cease. As explained by Acting Secretary Friedlander, the outbreak of COVID-19 is “a public health emergency.” Therefore, “[a]ggressive social distancing measures have been mandated by emergency order as a necessary measure to limit and contain the spread of the COVID-19 infection.”

For more information, contact Elizabeth Kuhn, 502-696-5300.


Ky. Revised Statute 15.241 states: The Attorney General, upon certification by the secretary of the Cabinet for Health Services, shall seek injunctive relief in a course of proper jurisdiction to prevent violations of the provisions of KRS Chapter 216B regarding abortion facilities or the administrative regulations promulgated in furtherance thereof in cases where other administrative penalties and legal sanctions imposed have failed to prevent or cause a discontinuance of the violation. (Effective: July 15, 1998, amended 2005)

It is KRLA’s understanding that if there are violations and the (acting) secretary certifies, then the AG is required to seek injunctive relief. If there are violations and the (acting) secretary does not certify, the AG has discretion whether to seek the relief.

HB451 would further amend KRS 15.241 “to seek injunctive relief as well as civil or criminal penalties for violations of KRS Chapter 216B relating to abortion facilities and KRS 311.720 to 311.830 relating to abortions; provide that, in the absence of certification, the Attorney General may seek injunctive relief as well as civil or criminal penalties.”

The next date that the General Assembly will convene is Wednesday, April 1. We believe our pro-life legislators will pass HB451. But would Gov. Beshear sign it into law?


KRLA Forum
by Margie Montgomery, KRLA Executive Director

At my desk after a radio interview today, I saw I had a message in the form of a short video on my cell phone. Oh, who’s that crawling on the polished walnut floor? Is it — yes, it’s a baby … looks like a baby about eight months old, with curly dark hair and a lot of determination. Is it ‐ yes, it is, it’s Irene, my latest great grandchild, and that sounds like her mom speaking to her and working from home during these critical days of the coronavirus stay-at-home routine.

How precious! And then that terrible reminder hit me again: that our Governor’s executive order is being ignored — that all non-essential and elective surgeries be canceled.

According to an article in the 3/23/2020 Courier Journal, his mandate appears to permit abortion (—an elective surgical procedure—) by giving providers “discretion” on what services to cancel, though it halts most “non-urgent, in-person” services. It further states that EMW Women’s Surgical Center in Louisville, the state’s only abortion clinic, plans to continue providing abortions.

As I looked at baby Irene again and visualized the hundreds upon hundreds of infants who lose their lives in brutal manners at this abortuary and so many more throughout our land, I fought the urge to scream! These providers ignore the directives of governors and attorney generals across the U.S., and confirm their facilities are still doing abortions!

A spokesperson for the ACLU, which represents the EMW, is quoted in the C-J article, “Abortion care is necessary and cannot be delayed without creating risks to patients’ health… As such, EMW is continuing to provide care, while abiding by all recommended measures to ensure patient safety.”

Handwashing aside, we have heard and witnessed testimonies from hundreds of women that their abortions were very unsafe.

What is also infuriating is that hundreds of Kentuckians are asking elected officials, whose responsibility is to protect tiny human lives, why these killing centers are getting a pass at this critical time, but the pro-lifers receive no response. Example: The following email shared with me was sent to Governor Andy Beshear this past week by an outraged pro-lifer at this miscarriage of justice, but it was not acknowledged.

Abortion is NOT essential. Abortion, killing of babies, a 99% non-therapeutic procedure, shouldn’t be going on in Louisville at the EMW chamber on Market Street in this extraordinary COVID 19 outbreak!

You order businesses to shut down because of the pandemic, yet permit Kentucky’s only killing center to operate as usual and potentially spread the virus further in our community.

Do something now! Lead by demanding this unnecessary business cease operating!

You can email the governor from this webpage, and the attorney general by clicking here.

Or, if you prefer, write a letter:
The Honorable Andy Beshear
Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky
700 Capitol Avenue, Suite 100
Frankfort, KY 40601


KRLA Forum

Third in the License to Abort Little Ones series

There is a little confusion in the Transfer Agreements term. Sometimes it is used in the singular and other times as plural. There are two agreements, one with a hospital and one with a local ambulance service.

It was brought out in the Kentucky Transfer Agreements (TA) trial in September 2017, that the crucial feature of any TA with a hospital is the “protocol for transferring medical records.” This was restated in an Appellant (Ky.) brief last October explaining to the Cincinnati Appellate Court why the TA case is far from being resolved.

Kentucky’s brief was in response to an ACLU brief stating that a new policy issued September 30, 2019, by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare (CMS) eliminates the requirement for Ambulatory Surgical Centers (ASC) to have

  1. doctors with admitting privileges on staff,
    or
  2. a written transfer agreement with a hospital,

in order to participate in the Medicare program.

The CMS states that

  1. the enactment of EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act) regulations, and
  2. the small number of transfers, and
  3. the burden that ASCs incur when faced with local hospital competition issues

are good reasons why no TA is needed.

They are banking on ‘911’ calls and city/county EMS to do the job.

This brings up a point: Abortion clinics in Kentucky are not required to be licensed as ASCs. Since they are not ASCs with more stringent hospital standards, the TAs are essential to the current licensure standards. Are we willing to say that Medicaid rules that key in on saving money and the low numbers of potential fatalities should define the new standard?

But, why not require that any Kentucky abortion clinic be licensed as an ASC? Isn’t abortion a surgical procedure? Yes, of course.

There are two types of surgical abortion: aspiration abortion and dilation and evacuation (D&E - dismemberment) abortion. Women up to 14 to 16 weeks pregnant can have an aspiration abortion (except for the baby’s skull which may need to be crushed before aspiration). D&E abortions are performed at 14 to 16 weeks or after.

Gov. Beshear has issued a license for PP to begin doing abortions in March. This is not legal unless PP has a TA which has not yet been publicized.

If they do not have a TA, they will be operating illegally.

So, why does the Guttmacher.org website which favors abortion, claim that the “Transfer Agreement with Hospital” requirement in Kentucky is permanently enjoined and is not in effect?

The LawAtlas.org site, which pulls data from the internet, states that Kentucky Law does require TAs.

Pro-lifers have reason to think positive: Two of the three judges on the panel were appointed by President Trump. At the hearing last August, KRLA staff and friends heard their questions and thought they seemed genuinely impartial and willing to consider the importance of safety for the aborted woman.

If the Appeals Court reverses the District Court decision, as it did for Kentucky’s Ultrasound Law last year, then PP will be required to get TAs, as will EMW, or the case may be appealed to SCOTUS.

Like the Ultrasound Law, the TA Law does not oppose abortion. The former requires that the woman be informed and the latter that she be protected in the event of an emergency.


KRLA Forum

First in the License to Abort Little Ones series

Does the Planned Parenthood clinic on 7th Street in Louisville have Transfer Agreements? Will it really begin doing abortions in March?


Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal | Published 5:06 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020 | Updated 6:11 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020

Planned Parenthood now has permission to provide abortions at its clinic in downtown Louisville, making it the second facility in Kentucky to offer the procedure at a time when providers in some states are closing clinics under pressure from anti-abortion laws.

The decision by the administration of Gov. Andy Beshear was hailed by Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky as a victory for women’s health and reproductive rights, saying the decision allows it to provide “a full range of reproductive health care.”

…Planned Parenthood said it plans to begin offering abortions in March.

Unlike EMW, which operates a storefront clinic and is the site of daily sidewalk protests by people opposed to abortion, Planned Parenthood’s clinic is set back off the road with on-site parking surrounded by a privacy fence.

Read more.


Do governors have the right to overrule legislation in the court system that is pending resolution?

The C-J reported in late September 2018 that Judge Stivers (a Fifth District Court judge) ruled in favor of the abortion clinics, and struck down the “state law requiring Kentucky abortion clinics to have written agreements with an ambulance service and hospital for emergencies… ” His ruling was appealed by Gov. Bevin to the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court. THAT IS WHY the article ALSO states:


Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal | Published 4:12 p.m. ET Sept. 28, 2018 | Updated 6:49 p.m. ET Sept. 28, 2018

The revocation of EMW's license would have made Kentucky the only state without a single abortion provider. Stivers had ordered that EMW could remain open while the legal challenge is pending… (Our emphasis)

What has changed? The TA case has NOT been ruled on by the Sixth Circuit Court. The only new document on PACER that we can find is the Amy Cubbage, Ackerson & Yann, PLLC, motion to withdraw as Counsel for EMW WOMEN’S SURGICAL CENTER, P.S.C., et al., filed 1/30/2020.

Do governors have the right to overrule legislation in the court system that is pending a resolution? And if Daniel Cameron decides to appeal that decision, if unfavorable, to SCOTUS, will Gov. Beshear have any right to grant a license to PP?


C-J article in 2019 reported on Judge Stiver’s challenge to Gov. Bevin to grant PP a license to abort

Last August the Bevin administration was advised to grant a license to Planned Parenthood, as reported in the C-J.


Deborah Yetter and David Harten, Louisville Courier Journal | Published 10:18 p.m. ET Aug. 16, 2019 | Updated 4:33 p.m. ET Aug. 17, 2019

…In a notice to the judge filed Friday, Meredith and lawyer M. Stephen Pitt, Bevin's general counsel, told the judge that the state had denied a license to Planned Parenthood and that he has no authority in the matter.

“Respectfully, this Court has no jurisdiction over the state licensing process," the notice said.

The state's denial comes amid an ongoing dispute over whether Kentucky abortion clinics must have transport and transfer agreements with an ambulance and hospital in the event of a medical emergency, as required by a 1998 state law.

Has Kentucky’s Transfer Agreement law been overturned? When? Does Planned Parenthood now have Transfer Agreements? We are keeping our ear to the ground.

For more background on this controversy, see the blog series on then-AG Beshear's Amicus brief on behalf of the abortion clinics, and the TA page on this site.


KRLA Forum

new_laws_b.jpg

Seventh in a Series: Pro-life Laws Under Attack

On December 9, due to the 2019 general election results, all but one of the wonderful attorneys who have defended the Heartbeat and Anti-eugenics laws ‘withdrew as counsel’ from the case. Some are now employed under new AG Daniel Cameron. Currently, only Attorney Catherine York is on the job, and we are not privy to how things may develop from here.

So far, the Commonwealth wants: (partial summary)

  • Discovery for HB5, to determine the practice and prevalence of race-, sex-, and disability-based abortions and the state’s interest in stopping these; and for SB9 to bring to light facts on viability that would show it is a moving marker and therefore unreliable
  • For the Court to deny EMW’s motion for Summary Judgment on HB5 since no previous case has determined whether a state can ban race-, sex-, and disability-selective abortions. “Roe and Casey focused on women who do not want a child at all, not on women who want a child as long as he or she has certain characteristics.” (This is changing; see previous post. -ed). Also, HB5 protects the medical profession so doctors will be viewed as healers not as facilitators of discrimination. HB5 combats eugenics which is an international trend at present.
  • For the Court to deny EMW’s motion for Summary Judgment on SB9 which is not a “6-week Ban” but rather shows compelling interest of Kentucky in the lives of its unborn children. The fetal heartbeat is the key medical marker that, unlike the old viability marker, does not move; it is a stable, universally recognized sign of life and important milestone in an unborn child’s growth. It is not detectable at 6 weeks but rather at 8 to 10 (from LMP) by transabdominal ultrasound. (emphasis added)

Numerous affidavits were attached to this Document in support of the Defendant’s arguments which were demanded to be struck by Plaintiffs who insisted they were Discovery.

Kentucky argued that Plaintiffs had also provided Discovery by their statement (Doc 4) from an EMW abortionist who claimed that she could not serve patients and had to turn away one with a fetal anomaly. Thus, their request for Summary Judgment was based on a “verified” complaint, which is the same as Discovery. Our attorneys were not ‘born yesterday’.

They noted that the EMW attorneys did not file for Summary Judgment based on the pleadings, in which case Secy. Meier could have been prevented from offering evidence, but rather cited its own verified complaint and a declaration, which allowed Secy. Meier to offer competing evidence.

Nevertheless, the affidavits in support of Kentucky’s arguments were ordered removed, and Plaintiffs continued to argue:

  • As the Supreme Court and every other court to consider a pre-viability abortion ban has held, there is no state interest strong enough to overcome a woman’s decision to obtain an abortion before viability. Defendant’s arguments to the contrary are nothing more than attempts to improperly re-litigate the well-settled constitutional right to abortion, and they should be rejected…
  • Both Bans Are Unconstitutional Under Supreme Court Precedent That Categorically Prohibits States From Banning Pre-Viability Abortions. …The Court is instructed to strike Defendant’s improper expert declarations from the record and deny his request for Discovery.

Many of the documents on PACER are lengthy. The reason for this blog series is to explain briefly (relatively) to Kentuckians what has become of our pro-life bills that our Legislature passed.


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

A strategy of pro-lifers in pursuing bills that address varying aspects of abortion is to roll back Roe v. Wade incrementally but surely.

The goal of reducing the number of abortions is perfectly met in HB5 and SB9.

The Plaintiffs state in documents 5 and 6 that SB9 would result in prohibiting 90% of the abortions in the Commonwealth by banning abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected. This may be an exaggeration.

EMW admits the 6 week LMP fetal heartbeat can only be detected by transvaginal ultrasound; SB9 only requires a standard medical procedure to detect the heartbeat. Thus, it prevents abortion of babies 8 to 10 weeks old. At 10 weeks the unborn child closely resembles the overall shape of a newborn baby though much smaller. (See image in left column on this page.) Thus, SB9 anchors Kentucky’s interest in prenatal life to immutable characteristics of humanity rather than a judicially invented construct. (emphasis added)

Currently EMW aborts approximately 3000+ babies each year. To reduce that number by the percent noted, there would be only 300 abortions — still far too many. But it is a step in the right direction, just as the Fetal Pain bill that passed in 2017 reduced the number because it narrowed the window for abortion to 20 weeks, which had been 23 at EMW.

At this writing there are 51 documents in view on the PACER website, with the latest filed by the Plaintiffs on December 16, 2019. Doc 48 suggests to Judge Hale that a current case, SisterSong v. Kemp (Georgia’s Heartbeat Law), has recently been updated to permit only limited discovery for the defendant, and that a federal district court preliminarily enjoined Alabama’s near-total ban on abortion on Oct 29 (2019).

Doc 50, filed on December 12, cites the wording in the SisterSong v. Kemp case that “[t]he Supreme Court has repeatedly and unequivocally held that under no circumstances whatsoever may a state prohibit or ban abortions prior to viability, no matter what the state asserts to support it.”

Plaintiffs also attached the Georgia Judge’s order, which also states that the State Defendants are permitted in limited discovery to “rely upon ‘legislative facts,’ which are ‘of the type that reviewing courts often rely upon in considering whether constitutional precedents should be overturned….’ ” By attaching this order, it would seem that the Plaintiffs do not believe that Judge Hale will overturn a SCOTUS precedent.

The reason the SisterSong case was cited is that Kentucky’s attorneys argued against Summary Judgment prior to Discovery in part based on that case which initially had specified no limitation to Discovery.

Kentucky has argued for Judge Hale to deny the Plaintiffs’ motion for Summary Judgment based on:

  • Plaintiffs’ inadequate reasons why the Court should deny/overturn the will of Kentuckians shown in the two statutes
  • Discovery has been denied such that defendants —the Commonwealth— cannot fully defend its laws
  • Though the viability standard was established long ago, it has since been questioned in suits such as Casey, which noted: “facts have so changed, or come to be seen so differently, as to have robbed the old rule of significant application or justification.”

Indeed! What if 4D ultrasounds had been around in 1973? Though ultrasound technology had first been used in the mid-1950s in Scotland, it was well into the 1970s before it became widely used in American hospitals.


KRLA Forum

breaking_news.png

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the challenge to Kentucky’s Ultrasound Law. “This is the best possible news defenders of life in the womb could receive! It is bad news for EMW Abortion facility and for Louisville Planned Parenthood,” stated KRLA President Diana Maldonado.

Thank you to Governor Matt Bevin for defending this law at the Appellate level and at the highest level. Tomorrow, Kentucky’s new Governor will be sworn in to office. Andy Beshear refused to defend the Ultrasound law when he was the Attorney General.

As reported by AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday left in place a Kentucky law requiring doctors to perform ultrasounds and show fetal images to patients before abortions.

The justices did not comment in refusing to review an appeals court ruling that upheld the law.

The American Civil Liberties Union had challenged the law on behalf of Kentucky’s lone remaining abortion clinic. The ACLU argued that “display and describe” ultrasound laws violate physicians’ speech rights under the First Amendment...

Read more.


KRLA Forum

In the going-on-nearly-three-years legal challenge to Kentucky’s Ultrasound Law (HB2) of 2017, a new document was filed in late October. Due to the General Election focus, we initially missed this announcement by Gov. Bevin.

Plaintiffs did not accept the victory for the Ultrasound Law that the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court handed down last April, and asked the Court for an “en banc” review of the decision. The Court declined, so Plaintiffs asked SCOTUS to issue a Writ of Certiorari. That would force the entire “bench” of the Sixth Circuit to review the decision.

The attorneys in Bevin’s Administration and the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services who are defending the law, since AG Beshear refused to, filed an opposing brief in late October, asking that the petition for the Writ be denied. Their brief delineates the issue:

The “Question Presented” that is viewed as requiring “better judgment” is: Whether the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the Commonwealth of Kentucky from regulating the practice of medicine by requiring a medical professional, prior to performing a medical procedure, to provide the patient with information that is truthful, non-misleading, and relevant to the procedure.

Kentucky’s 33-page brief explains why there is no Circuit conflict over the question and no recurring question it needs to resolve, and that the Appeals Court ruling is correct.

They point out that the petitioners (EMW) argue that HB2 is not an informed-consent law. They say a disclosure requirement cannot be considered valid unless it is consistent with the informed-consent preferences of special interest groups like the National Abortion Federation and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

The link to the brief is in the bulletin from Gov. Bevin, shared above.

Our pro-life attorney team has done a superb job of summing up for SCOTUS what is going on in the case. But, with the General Election results, will this wonderful team be in place to address any new challenges? If not, we want to again commend them for their dedicated work to save lives. If AG-elect Daniel Cameron is called on to complete their work, we wish him Godspeed.

Cameron has appointed Steve Pitt, Gov. Bevin's General Counsel, as his counsel and special advisor. Attorney Pitt served as chief litigator for Kentucky's Defense against the legal suits challenging our pro-life laws.


KRLA Forum

The Dismemberment Abortion bill that became law in spring 2018 is still in the court system. After being overturned at the District Court in Louisville last May, it was appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court. In mid-September, a flurry of Amicus Briefs were filed on behalf of EMW.

During the trial in Louisville, Defense (Ky) had argued that three methods could be used for humane fetal demise in place of tearing limbs off babies while they are alive. Plaintiffs vigorously argued that none of those— the KCl injection, Digoxin injection, nor the umbilical cord transection— was suitable, for numerous reasons. The Amicus briefs uphold the court arguments.

The first Amicus was submitted by:

  • THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS (ACOG)
  • THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (AMA)
  • THE NORTH AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR PEDIATRIC AND ADOLESCENT GYNECOLOGY (NASPG)
  • THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS IN WOMEN’S HEALTH (NPWH)
  • THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NURSE-MIDWIVES (ACNM) and
  • THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS (ACOOG)

Whew! That’s a lot of friends. If only these associations were friends of humankind, born and unborn.

They argue that the Commonwealth’s proposed demise methods are invasive, additionally risky, medically unnecessary, experimental, and unreliable, among other points. All of these were refuted by the Defense during the trial.

The second Amicus was submitted by numerous states, including:

  • NEW YORK, CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, HAWAI‘I, ILLINOIS, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, OREGON, PENNSYLVANIA, VERMONT, VIRGINIA, and WASHINGTON, and the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

This brief has a number of undue burden reasons.

The third was submitted by the

  • SOCIETY FOR MATERNAL-FETAL MEDICINE

Sounds so motherly.

Its main point is that the Potassium Chloride (KCl) injection method is not feasible in an abortion clinic. This was also refuted during the trial.

For background on this case, see here. An Amicus was filed by 16 states on behalf of Kentucky last July.


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

The suit against Kentucky’s Heartbeat and Anti-Eugenics Laws is intent on maintaining the status quo. Kentucky’s defense asks Judge Hale to see Life in a new and better light.

Our wonderful attorneys want legal discovery to begin. They want the judge to consider whether EMW’s case actually benefits Kentucky women, physicians or the citizens who elect legislators to represent their views. We expect our lawmakers to create statutes that are in line with legal common sense and not merely court precedents based on tired, irrelevant rulings and opinions.

Kentucky, this is an opportunity for new vistas to a brighter future!

Let’s get personal

HB5 was delivered to Gov. Bevin for his signature on March 14, 2019, but had not yet been signed into law when EMW’s attorneys filed suit to oppose it.

In their opening document on March 14, 2019, the attorneys for EMW state that …“in violation of more than four decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence”, HB5 is unconstitutional because it bans abortion under certain circumstances, prior to viability.

While viability is their central point, many points are stated— 49 of them in their first document. Let’s look at point number three.
3 - “Plaintiffs challenge the Act because it undermines their mission to honor and support the decisions their patients make, whether it is to continue or to end a pregnancy based on their own personal circumstances and what is best for themselves and their families.” HB5 wrests the woman’s personal decision to get an abortion, and deprives her of the ability to make this personal decision.

HB5 has other persons in view. In part, the new law reads:
The Supreme Court of the United States of America has recognized that states have a legitimate interest in protecting the life of the unborn; and

  • Recognizing the human rights of an unborn child does not contravene prior Supreme Court jurisprudence nor undermine a woman’s right to self-determination or bodily autonomy, but instead upholds the state's legitimate interest in protecting the lives of unborn human beings and the rights of persons regardless of sex, race, color, national origin, or disability; and
  • The right to bodily autonomy and self-determination is separate and distinct from the termination of a pregnancy based on the unborn child’s sex, race, color, national origin, or disability; and
  • Moral and philosophical concepts of dignity hold that all human beings are entitled to receive ethical and humane treatment and are to be respected and valued in all phases of life, regardless of sex, race, color, national origin, or disability…

Our attorneys upheld all these reasons (and others) why discriminatory abortions are unfair as well as prohibited by state, federal and international laws that support the rights of all people to dignity, equality, and freedom from discrimination that is based on sex, race, color, national origin, or disability.

It is obvious we have a dilemma of competing rights. Judge Hale must decide whether to favor the right to abortion or the right to life of pre-born babies and the rights of states to protect them. Either way, he can quote from the law.

Which view will he take?



Posts on this page

6/17/2020 3:01:46 AM
A wrap-up on pro-life legislation that is languishing
4/25/2020 6:07:53 AM
Pro-life legislation SB9 and HB451 not passed; abortion clinics continue to operate during pandemic
4/16/2020 11:54:06 AM
Legislators merge HB451 with SB9 at the last moment of 2020 Session
4/16/2020 9:38:14 AM
2020 Legislative Session bombshell
3/31/2020 1:10:59 PM
Will AG Cameron’s call for abortion providers to join other medical professionals to cease elective procedures be ignored?
3/27/2020 12:59:57 PM
Attorney General Daniel Cameron directs CHFS Acting Secretary to certify that abortion providers are violating his ban
3/27/2020 11:40:53 AM
Help stop elective surgeries to abort babies
2/28/2020 12:31:28 PM
How many Transfer Agreements are required by Kentucky Law for licensure of an abortion clinic?
2/1/2020 6:47:39 AM
C-J reports that Planned Parenthood will begin doing abortions in Louisville in March
12/26/2019 12:38:58 PM
Defendants argue for humanity of doctors to be upheld and humanity of child to be respected
12/26/2019 12:29:23 PM
Though the viability standard was established long ago, it has since been questioned in suits such as Cas…
12/9/2019 9:51:25 AM
Supreme Court rejects ACLU challenge to Kentucky’s Ultrasound Law
11/21/2019 10:46:56 AM
Bevin administration attorneys file brief asking the Supreme Court to deny the Writ of Certiorari requested by ACLU for EMW
11/21/2019 10:33:09 AM
Flurry of Amicus briefs filed on behalf of EMS in HB454 legal case
11/15/2019 11:26:14 AM
Legal suit opposing Kentucky’s Heartbeat and Anti-eugenics Laws focused on status quo

All Forum Headlines




Liberty meme

A Ryan Bomberger Meme. Click to read about President Trump's website to counter social media censorship.