{"id":221602,"date":"2020-04-10T12:19:55","date_gmt":"2020-04-10T17:19:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=221602"},"modified":"2020-05-01T19:44:33","modified_gmt":"2020-05-02T00:44:33","slug":"us-states-pro-life-un-human-rights-committee","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/us-states-pro-life-un-human-rights-committee\/","title":{"rendered":"Nearly two dozen U.S. states passed pro-life laws last year. The UN Human Rights Committee disapproves."},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

As <\/span>pro-abortion groups<\/span><\/a> continue to call for expanded access to abortion and contraception around the globe, the UN Human Rights Committee seems determined to protect abortion, recently asserting<\/a> that it is a violation of international human rights law for U.S. states to regulate abortion.<\/span><\/p>\n

The U.S.\u00a0State Department has not yet responded to the committee\u2019s inquiry into the matter. If a written statement is not produced before the next election and a pro-abortion president takes office, it is likely that the response from such an administration to the UN could reflect an erosion of pro-life policies in the United States.<\/span><\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Trump HHS Secretary to United Nations: \u2018There is no international right to an abortion\u2019<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In March 2019, the <\/span>UN Human Rights Committee<\/span><\/a> expressed its disapproval to the Trump administration regarding federal and state level pro-life laws, in its review of the nation’s record on human rights. The Committee views abortion — the deliberate killing of preborn children in the womb — as a human right, and<\/span>\u00a0has been openly critical of various pro-life actions taken by President Trump. One point of contention was the president\u2019s decision to expand the <\/span>Mexico City Policy<\/span><\/a>\u00a0which prohibits foreign assistance from being given to groups who commit and advocate for abortion overseas.\u00a0International health organizations are still able to provide care under this measure, but in order to receive taxpayer funding, they must not prioritize abortion.\u00a0<\/span>This new Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy<\/a>\u00a0has been disparagingly referred to as a “global gag rule.”\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Another point of contention <\/span> was President Trump executive order allowing employers and insurers to make <\/span>\u201cconscience-based objections\u201d<\/span><\/a> to the preventive care mandated in the 2009 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This Act had forced the <\/span>Little Sisters of the Poor<\/span><\/a>\u00a0— a group of Catholic nuns — to fund abortions and contraception against their will. Though President Trump\u2019s order enables groups like theirs to make decisions in line with their conscience, the <\/span>UN Committee<\/span><\/a> was concerned about possible restrictions being placed on ‘reproductive care’.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n