{"id":311060,"date":"2024-04-24T13:42:03","date_gmt":"2024-04-24T18:42:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=311060"},"modified":"2024-04-24T16:04:08","modified_gmt":"2024-04-24T21:04:08","slug":"supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit ’emergency’ abortions"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in Moyle v. United States<\/i><\/a> and Idaho v. United States<\/a>,<\/em> involving whether or not Idaho emergency room doctors can intentionally and directly end the lives of preborn children by abortion for allegedly “medically necessary” reasons. The Biden Department of Justice (DOJ) previously sued<\/a> the state of Idaho, claiming the state’s Defense of Life Act \u2014 which protects preborn children from abortion \u2014 violates the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). The state of Idaho asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue, and in January, the court agreed<\/a>.<\/p>\n

EMTALA requires that all hospitals receiving federal Medicare funds provide stabilizing<\/em> treatment to patients in the emergency room during a medical emergency. The DOJ claims that women\u2019s lives will be at risk if emergency room doctors cannot commit abortions \u2014\u00a0but induced abortion, in which a child is intentionally<\/em> killed, is not a medically necessary act. Furthermore, early delivery \u2014 in which a preborn child is not<\/em> intentionally killed \u2014 is not considered an induced abortion and is completely legal in the state, as are other treatments during emergency situations, including treatments for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages. All of these procedures, which do not intentionally kill a preborn child, are permitted under Idaho\u2019s law if the woman\u2019s life is at risk, as well as in cases of rape or incest.<\/p>\n

\u201cDespite the portrayal by the media and the Biden administration, both Idaho law and EMTALA share a consistent goal: to protect everyone\u2019s life, including unborn children,\u201d Idaho Attorney General Ra\u00fal Labrador previously said in a statement<\/a>. \u201cIdaho\u2019s law is perfectly consistent with EMTALA, which provides explicit protections for \u2018unborn children\u2019 in four separate places. The notion that EMTALA requires doctors to perform abortions is absurd. We are asking the Supreme Court to end the administration\u2019s unlawful overreach and to respect the people of Idaho\u2019s decision to protect life.\u201d<\/p>\n

Medical Emergencies<\/h3>\n

During the oral arguments<\/a>, Justice Sonia Sotomayor relayed a story assumed to be that of Anya Cook<\/a>, a Florida woman who experienced preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM). \u201cThis is a story of a real woman,” Sotomayor said. “She was discharged in Florida because the fetus still had fetal tones and the hospital said she\u2019s not likely to die, but there are going to be serious medical complications.\u201d<\/p>\n

In Cook’s case, she was given antibiotics and then discharged from the hospital. PPROM would generally not qualify as needing to have an abortion committed in the emergency room; again, EMTALA is meant to have a patient be stabilized<\/strong>, and then sent to the appropriate medical department or facility to receive further, more specific, care.<\/p>\n

In cases like Cook’s, for PPROM, the standard of treatment, as reported by Cleveland Clinic<\/a> and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia<\/a> (CHOP), is expectant management \u2014 essentially, providing antibiotics if needed, admitting the patient, and carefully observing and waiting. If complications do arise, then an early delivery may be performed, but as noted, an early delivery is not the same thing as an induced<\/em> abortion, in which a preborn child is intentionally killed. In Cook’s case, EMTALA would not apply; emergency room doctors should have stabilized her, and then transferred her to the hospital’s labor and delivery department to be cared for on a longer-term basis. The emergency room doctors themselves would not have been in a position where they would need to commit an abortion.<\/p>\n

An early delivery might be necessary, but in some cases, it is not. With expectant management, the mother may be able to last to a point where the baby has reached viability and can be born, prematurely, but safely.<\/p>\n

DOJ Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, however, argued that there is no possible treatment<\/em> in which a preborn child could survive PPROM, but this<\/a> is patently false<\/a>. In fact, a 2020 study on PPROM examined preterm infants delivered early at 23 weeks due to the condition and found a 28% survival rate<\/a>. Read about some of those survivors here<\/a> and here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

“Unborn Child”<\/h3>\n

Justice Samuel Alito noted<\/a> the fact that the term “unborn child” \u2014 as noted earlier this year by Attorney General Labrador \u2014 is specifically mentioned in EMTALA as deserving protection. \u201cIsn\u2019t that an odd phrase to put in a statute that imposes a mandate to perform abortions?\u201d Alito asked. \u201cHave you ever seen an abortion statute that uses the phrase ‘unborn child’?\u201d<\/p>\n

Prelogar claimed that the phrase was put into place in 1989 to address one specific issue during one specific time… and therefore, is not applicable today. \u201cIt\u2019s not an odd phrase when you look at what Congress was doing,\u201d she said. \u201cThere were well publicized cases where women were experiencing conditions their own health and life were not in danger, but the fetus was in grave distress and hospitals weren\u2019t treating them.”<\/p>\n

In a brief filed in the case, the Charlotte Lozier Institute said this was not the case.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe United States\u2019 attempt to diminish the \u2018unborn child\u2019s\u2019 life as secondary \u2014 one that must be protected only if her mother\u2019s health is not threatened but loses all value if her mother\u2019s health is in jeopardy \u2014 is atextual,\u201d the brief said. \u201cCongress expected hospitals and physicians to preserve both lives wherever possible.\u201d<\/p>\n

Mental Health and Conscience Rights<\/h3>\n

Another argument raised was that of mental health, in a situation in which a woman was so severely depressed that she might “need” to have her child intentionally killed at the emergency room. Justice Samuel Alito asked if “health” was to include mental health as well as physical, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett seemed skeptical<\/a> of such a scenario qualifying for EMTALA. \u201cIt\u2019s hard for me to see with a mental health condition that couldn\u2019t be stabilized,” she said.<\/p>\n

Prelogar, however, argued this was not something that would take place. “Let me be very clear about our position,” she said. “That could never lead to pregnancy termination because that is not the accepted standard of practice to treat.”<\/p>\n

However, intentionally killing a child isn’t the ‘accepted standard of practice to treat’ any of the other pregnancy conditions raised by DOJ \u2014\u00a0not even PPROM.<\/p>\n

Also argued was the issue of conscience protections; Prelogar said hospitals would need to determine what an individual doctor’s feelings on abortion were before staffing them in the emergency room. \u201cThe hospital should have plans in place to honor the individual doctor\u2019s conscience objection while ensuring appropriate staffing for emergency use,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

Justice John Roberts seemed skeptical, asking if that meant a hospital would be out of compliance with EMTALA if they didn’t have at least one pro-abortion doctor staffed in the emergency room, and therefore, lose their Medicare funding. Prelogar answered<\/strong> yes<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n

Government Overreach<\/h3>\n

Justice Neal Gorsuch also questioned Prelogar about the precedent this case could potentially present; though Prelogar said this wasn’t applicable, Gorsuch said that this could turn \u201cregulation of medicine into a federal function” by linking federal funding for hospitals to the regulations and standards decided upon by the government.<\/p>\n

Justice Samuel Alito seemed to agree. \u201cHow can you impose restrictions on what Idaho can criminalize?\u201d he asked, continuing, \u201cThe theory is, Congress can tell a state or any other entity or person, \u2018Look, here is some money or other thing of value, and if you want to accept it, fine, then you have to accept certain conditions?'”<\/p>\n

Prelogar seemed to insinuate that this is exactly<\/em> what the Biden administration expects.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat Idaho has done here is directly interfered with the ability of the regulated parties who have taken these funds \u2014 federal funds with conditions attached \u2014 from being able to comply with the federal law that governs their behavior,” she said. “And this was an essential part of the bargain that the federal government struck with hospitals in substantially investing in their hospital systems.\u201d<\/p>\n

Joshua Turner, the lawyer arguing on behalf of the state of Idaho, noted that this is a real possibility, and the outcome of this case will reach much farther than just his own state. \u201cThere are 22 states with abortion laws on the books,\u201d Turner said. \u201cThis isn\u2019t going to end with Idaho. This question is going to come up in state after state.\u201d<\/p>\n

Live Action president and CEO Lila Rose stated in a press release<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Medicine heals. Abortion kills. Abortion is not emergency medicine, and federal law does not require abortion in situations of a medical emergency. The Biden administration argues that abortion is needed to ensure mothers receive medical care for medical conditions and emergencies such as ectopic pregnancy, hemorrhage, and preeclampsia. Abortion is not needed in any of these cases. As the State of Idaho and its attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) point out in their brief<\/a>\u00a0before the Court:\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cTreatments for ectopic and molar pregnancies are not abortions under Idaho law. And conditions like preeclampsia, eclampsia, and HELLP Syndrome are \u2018life-threatening situation[s]\u2019 for which Idaho law allows \u2018life-saving surgery\u2019 or \u2018early delivery.’\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The Biden Administration understands this reality. This case is not about ensuring mothers receive emergency medical care; it is about destroying Idaho\u2019s laws protecting its youngest children from the violence and death of abortion. Contrary to the specious argument that abortion is medicine, abortion is in truth a violation of medicine\u2019s foundational promise to heal. Forcing emergency room doctors to act as abortionists is illegal and unjust. I implore the Supreme Court to follow the law, and allow Idaho\u2019s law to stand.<\/em><\/p>\n

Oral arguments ended shortly after 12:00pm, at which point the court recessed and will re-convene tomorrow.<\/p>\n

The DOJ put a pro-life grandmother in jail for protesting the killing of preborn children. Please take 30-seconds to TELL CONGRESS: STOP THE DOJ FROM TARGETING PRO-LIFE AMERICANS.<\/i><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, involving whether or not Idaho emergency room doctors can intentionally and directly end the lives of preborn children by abortion for allegedly “medically necessary” reasons. The Biden Department of Justice (DOJ) previously sued the state […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":268238,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit 'emergency' abortions<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case on whether Idaho ER docs can intentionally kill preborn children if 'medically necessary.'\" \/>\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\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit 'emergency' abortions\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case on whether Idaho ER docs can intentionally kill preborn children if 'medically necessary.'\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/\" \/>\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=\"2024-04-24T18:42:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-04-24T21:04:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/GettyImages-91222902-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=\"Cassy Cooke\" \/>\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=\"Cassy Cooke\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Cassy Cooke\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/16622da192101346f516b7444d125392\"},\"headline\":\"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit ’emergency’ abortions\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-04-24T18:42:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-24T21:04:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/\"},\"wordCount\":1640,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Analysis\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit 'emergency' abortions\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-04-24T18:42:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-24T21:04:08+00:00\",\"description\":\"The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case on whether Idaho ER docs can intentionally kill preborn children if 'medically necessary.'\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit ’emergency’ abortions\"}]},{\"@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\/16622da192101346f516b7444d125392\",\"name\":\"Cassy Cooke\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8b602f8210f1a7d948ca1c0dcab11fad?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8b602f8210f1a7d948ca1c0dcab11fad?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Cassy Cooke\"},\"description\":\"Cassy has over 20 years of experience as a writer and editor, most of which have been spent covering pro-life issues like abortion, disability rights, euthanasia, and more.\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/author\/cassy-fiano\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit 'emergency' abortions","description":"The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case on whether Idaho ER docs can intentionally kill preborn children if 'medically necessary.'","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\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit 'emergency' abortions","og_description":"The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case on whether Idaho ER docs can intentionally kill preborn children if 'medically necessary.'","og_url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/","og_site_name":"Live Action News","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/liveaction","article_published_time":"2024-04-24T18:42:03+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-04-24T21:04:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":650,"url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/GettyImages-91222902-supreme-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Cassy Cooke","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@liveaction","twitter_site":"@liveaction","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Cassy Cooke","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/"},"author":{"name":"Cassy Cooke","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/16622da192101346f516b7444d125392"},"headline":"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit ’emergency’ abortions","datePublished":"2024-04-24T18:42:03+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-24T21:04:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/"},"wordCount":1640,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Analysis"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/","url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/","name":"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit 'emergency' abortions","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-04-24T18:42:03+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-24T21:04:08+00:00","description":"The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case on whether Idaho ER docs can intentionally kill preborn children if 'medically necessary.'","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/supreme-court-oral-arguments-emergency-abortions\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether ERs have to commit ’emergency’ abortions"}]},{"@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\/16622da192101346f516b7444d125392","name":"Cassy Cooke","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8b602f8210f1a7d948ca1c0dcab11fad?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8b602f8210f1a7d948ca1c0dcab11fad?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Cassy Cooke"},"description":"Cassy has over 20 years of experience as a writer and editor, most of which have been spent covering pro-life issues like abortion, disability rights, euthanasia, and more.","url":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/author\/cassy-fiano\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/311060"}],"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\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=311060"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/311060\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":311102,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/311060\/revisions\/311102"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/268238"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=311060"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=311060"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=311060"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}