{"id":206500,"date":"2019-07-13T14:31:20","date_gmt":"2019-07-13T19:31:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=206500"},"modified":"2019-07-14T22:14:47","modified_gmt":"2019-07-15T03:14:47","slug":"court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

(ACLJ<\/a>)\u00a0Ohio recently enacted a pro-life law entitled the Heartbeat Protection Act. (Full disclosure: I helped draft the bill that was adopted.) The new law amends and modifies an existing requirement that\u00a0abortionists\u00a0test to see if the baby in the womb has a heartbeat and to tell the expectant mother the results of that test. Other provisions in the new\u00a0law create remedies for post-abortion women and\u00a0add valuable abortion reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The most controversial new provision declares that if a heartbeat is found, the baby is legally protected from abortion \u2013 i.e., it is a crime to abort a baby with a heartbeat (absent a serious threat to the mother).<\/p>\n

Unsurprisingly, abortion providers challenged the Ohio Heartbeat Law in federal court, claiming the ban on abortions after the detection of a heartbeat violate the teachings of Roe v. Wade<\/em> and Planned Parenthood v. Casey<\/em>, two important (but badly mistaken) Supreme Court decisions on abortion. And unsurprisingly, a federal district court issued an injunction halting enforcement of the law in Preterm-Cleveland v. Yost<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

What was <\/em>surprising, to me anyway, was how<\/em> the court\u2019s opinion was written. Abortionists could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge\u2019s decision themselves. Why do I say that? Let\u2019s look at how this ruling follows what we might call the NARAL\/Planned Parenthood Instruction Manual:<\/p>\n

1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Don\u2019t call it \u201cabortion.\u201d Call it \u201cabortion care.\u201d<\/strong> The word \u201cabortion\u201d has ugly connotations. \u201cCare,\u201d however, has a positive feel. Apparently the abortion lobby did some polling and decided that it was better to pitch abortion as a form of \u201ccare\u201d (as with \u201creproductive care\u201d). So starting some years back, abortion proponents began using the phrase \u201cabortion care\u201d<\/a> in place of \u201cabortion\u201d whenever they could. (We called the abortion apologists out<\/a> on this in a brief we filed back in 2014.)<\/p>\n

This terminology switch has been phased in over the years. Compare the 2015 International Planned Parenthood Foundation propaganda guide \u201cHow to talk about abortion<\/a>\u201d (no mention of preference for the term \u201cabortion care\u201d), with the 2018 version (\u201cabortion care<\/a>\u201d listed under \u201cPrefer\u201d category of terminology on p. 16) and is now becoming the norm in pro-abortion circles. In his opinion enjoining the Ohio Heartbeat Law, U.S. District Judge Michael R. Barrett uses the term \u201cabortion care\u201d at least four times in the first 4-1\/2 pages of his opinion, even where the phrasing is blatantly inaccurate. For example, on page 5 he writes that the Heartbeat Protection Act \u201cwill prohibit almost all abortion care in Ohio.\u201d But of course, the Act does not prohibit any care<\/em>\u2013 disinfecting, monitoring vital signs, anesthesia, helping with post-abortion recovery \u2013 only the abortion<\/em> is prohibited.<\/p>\n

2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Don\u2019t call it a \u201cheartbeat.\u201d<\/strong> The slogan, \u201cAbortion stops a beating heart,\u201d has long been an effective way to highlight the injustice and inhumanity of abortion. The Ohio Heartbeat Protection Act directly incorporates this notion \u2013 that abortion stops a beating heart \u2013 into law . . . which the abortion proponents hate. But they can\u2019t avoid the centrality of heartbeats to the law and thus to their constitutional challenge. In fact, the pro-abortion challengers admit that a heartbeat can be detected as early as six weeks of pregnancy<\/em>. So a cardinal rule is to find some way of saying \u201cheartbeat\u201d without using that word. Thus, even though the law itself says \u201cheartbeat,\u201d Judge Bennett uses only the far more technical jargon, \u201ccardiac activity\u201d (pp. 2-4, 8).<\/p>\n

3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Don\u2019t even admit there is a \u201cheart.\u201d <\/strong>Judge Bennett does not even refer to the organ producing the \u201ccardiac activity\u201d as a heart<\/em>. Instead, he refers (p. 3) to \u201ccells that form the basis for the development of the heart later in gestation.\u201d In other words, there\u2019s no heart there, just some \u201ccells\u201d that are the \u201cbasis\u201d for what will \u201clater\u201d develop into a heart. (Never mind that those cells are pumping blood<\/a>!)<\/p>\n

4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Give the pro-abortion side more than it is entitled to get.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 a. The challengers requested a preliminary injunction against the heartbeat law. To get it, they must show a \u201clikelihood\u201d of success in the lawsuit. All Judge Bennett had to do to grant their wish was find such a \u201clikelihood.\u201d But instead, he declared that the challengers \u201care certain to succeed\u201d (p. 6). Has he prejudged the case?<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 b. The challengers argued that the ban on post-heartbeat abortions violated Roe<\/em> and Casey<\/em>. But did Judge Bennett enjoin the section<\/em> of the Act banning such abortions? No. Instead, he enjoined the entire <\/em>Act (p. 12), with no discussion or even hint that there is anything wrong with any of the many other provisions the Act contains.<\/p>\n

Thankfully, the case is not over. But this is not an encouraging start.<\/p>\n

Here at the ACLJ, we have already offered extensive legal consultations on the drafting of this pro-life law. We stand ready to assist in the defense of this case as well and plan to file as friend of the court in opposition to the pro-abortion challengers.<\/p>\n

Editor’s Note: This article was published at ACLJ.org<\/a> and is reprinted here with permission.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cLike\u201d Live Action News on Facebook<\/a> for more pro-life news and commentary!<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

(ACLJ)\u00a0Ohio recently enacted a pro-life law entitled the Heartbeat Protection Act. (Full disclosure: I helped draft the bill that was adopted.) The new law amends and modifies an existing requirement that\u00a0abortionists\u00a0test to see if the baby in the womb has a heartbeat and to tell the expectant mother the results of that test. Other provisions […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":651,"featured_media":191840,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false},"categories":[15,7077],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nFederal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"When abortion providers challenged the Ohio Heartbeat Law, they could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge\u2019s decision themselves.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"When abortion providers challenged the Ohio Heartbeat Law, they could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge\u2019s decision themselves.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Live Action News\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/liveaction\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-07-13T19:31:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-07-15T03:14:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/11\/judge-law-supreme-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"650\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Walter M. Weber\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@liveaction\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@liveaction\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Walter M. Weber\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Walter M. Weber\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/16f3f29b2b9975c52e9255717799e7de\"},\"headline\":\"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-07-13T19:31:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-07-15T03:14:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/\"},\"wordCount\":866,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Analysis\",\"Guest Column\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/\",\"name\":\"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-07-13T19:31:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-07-15T03:14:47+00:00\",\"description\":\"When abortion providers challenged the Ohio Heartbeat Law, they could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge\u2019s decision themselves.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/\",\"name\":\"Live Action News\",\"description\":\"Covering Human Rights, Abortion, & Pro-Life Issues\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Live Action\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/Live-Action-Logo-Black.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/Live-Action-Logo-Black.png\",\"width\":701,\"height\":710,\"caption\":\"Live Action\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/liveaction\",\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/liveaction\",\"https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/liveactionorg\/\",\"https:\/\/www.pinterest.com\/LiveActionFilms\/\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/LiveActionFilms\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/16f3f29b2b9975c52e9255717799e7de\",\"name\":\"Walter M. Weber\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7cf98f9ec38ea4bd84543eccd1726b39?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7cf98f9ec38ea4bd84543eccd1726b39?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Walter M. Weber\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/author\/walter-weber\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion","description":"When abortion providers challenged the Ohio Heartbeat Law, they could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge\u2019s decision themselves.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion","og_description":"When abortion providers challenged the Ohio Heartbeat Law, they could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge\u2019s decision themselves.","og_url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/","og_site_name":"Live Action News","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/liveaction","article_published_time":"2019-07-13T19:31:20+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-07-15T03:14:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":650,"url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/11\/judge-law-supreme-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Walter M. Weber","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@liveaction","twitter_site":"@liveaction","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Walter M. Weber","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/"},"author":{"name":"Walter M. Weber","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/16f3f29b2b9975c52e9255717799e7de"},"headline":"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion","datePublished":"2019-07-13T19:31:20+00:00","dateModified":"2019-07-15T03:14:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/"},"wordCount":866,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Analysis","Guest Column"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/","url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/","name":"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-07-13T19:31:20+00:00","dateModified":"2019-07-15T03:14:47+00:00","description":"When abortion providers challenged the Ohio Heartbeat Law, they could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge\u2019s decision themselves.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-naral-planned-parenthood-script-abortion\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Federal court follows NARAL\/Planned Parenthood script on how to write a pro-abortion opinion"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#website","url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/","name":"Live Action News","description":"Covering Human Rights, Abortion, & Pro-Life Issues","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization","name":"Live Action","url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/Live-Action-Logo-Black.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/Live-Action-Logo-Black.png","width":701,"height":710,"caption":"Live Action"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/liveaction","https:\/\/twitter.com\/liveaction","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/liveactionorg\/","https:\/\/www.pinterest.com\/LiveActionFilms\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/LiveActionFilms"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/16f3f29b2b9975c52e9255717799e7de","name":"Walter M. Weber","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7cf98f9ec38ea4bd84543eccd1726b39?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7cf98f9ec38ea4bd84543eccd1726b39?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Walter M. Weber"},"url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/author\/walter-weber\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206500"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/651"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=206500"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206500\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":206542,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206500\/revisions\/206542"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/191840"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=206500"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=206500"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=206500"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}