Articles Tagged ‘Supreme Court’

Case Over False Political Ads Against Pro-Life Democrat Heads to Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the federal case stemming from political ads by the Susan B. Anthony (SBA) List, a pro-life group heavily tilted toward Republicans, that falsely claimed former Rep. Steve Driehaus, a pro-life Democrat, had voted for taxpayer-funded abortion.

During the 2010 elections, the SBA List initiated ads on billboards and elsewhere claiming that in voting for healthcare reform, then-Rep. Driehaus had “voted FOR taxpayer-funded abortion.”  Rep. Driehaus challenged this claim, filing a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission arguing that the SBA List ads violated Ohio’s false-statement laws, which prohibit the making of knowingly or recklessly false statements to influence an election campaign.  The state commission found “probable cause” warranting a full hearing on Driehaus’s complaint.

DFLA Statement on Young v. UPS

For Immediate Release

September 12, 2014

Contact: Kristen Day: 202-220-3066

 

“As a pro-life advocate, I am proud to stand here to support Peggy Young. In our movement, we are often accused of caring only for the unborn child and ignoring the needs of the women. The fact that I am joined by 22 other pro-life groups is a testament to our commitment to the value of life and of raising children. Denying benefits and not providing reasonable accommodations for a pregnant woman is not pro-life.

 

The Court of Appeals was in error with its interpretation of the PDA. If the Supreme Court upholds that position, it could put a woman in the unjustifiable position of choosing between the welfare of her unborn child and her economic security. This is wrong.

 

The earlier interpretation by the courts seriously weakens the effect of the PDA and could change the law and put women in situations where they are pressured to abort. That is not pro-life. Pregnancy is an important feature of human life. The right to bear children and have families is fundamental. Consequently, a woman’s distinctive situation in that vital aspect of life should be respected and supported by her employer.

 

We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will correctly interpret the text of law as it reflects the purpose of Congress in enacting it.”

 

WWW.DEMOCRATSFORLIFE.ORG

 

MEDIA CONTACT

 

KRISTEN DAY

 

202-220-3066

 

DFLA Urges Supreme Court to Uphold Religious-Freedom

Rights to Object to Facilitating Abortions

DFLA filed an amicus curiae ("friend of the court" brief in two U.S. Supreme Court cases to support conscience rights of business owners and their corporations.

The brief of Democrats for Life of America and former congressman Bart Stupak, both of whom supported the Affordable Care Act as a whole, focuses on the fact that the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga owners and companies object to facilitating drugs and devices that they reasonably fear may cause termination of a new embryo.

"Our nation has a longstanding and pervasive tradition of accommodating conscientious objections to facilitating abortion," said Kristen Day, Executive Director of Democrats For Life-a tradition that reflects (in the brief word's) "the seriousness of the burden on conscience when the objector is forced to take a human life" through participation in abortion, capital punishment, or euthanasia.  Conscience protections for abortion objectors, the brief argues, frequently "extend to for-profit businesses, not just individuals and non-profit organizations,", and extend "far beyond the case of direct involvement in the performance of the abortion."

DFLA Press Release
DFLA amicus curie brief

DFLA Mission Statement

Democrats For Life of America advocates and supports programs and policies that respect and promote life from conception to natural death. This includes, but is not limited to, opposition to abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia.  Learn more...