Among the foundational purposes of government is the legal protection of vulnerable citizens against attacks by others or by government itself. Since the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions of 1973 our nation has withdrawn the vast majority of legal protections the unborn once enjoyed, contributing to new arguments over withdrawing protection for the newborn, the disabled, the sick elderly, and even the mentally ill and depressed. Reversing this spiral of declining respect for life is a cultural challenge, but cultural efforts cannot succeed without the commitment of society to embody protection for life in its foundational law. CLI supports these efforts through pinpoint research, data collection, and legal arguments offered to lawmakers and the courts by staff members and associated scholars.

Adoption Tax Credits: Utilization, State Expansions, and Taxpayer Savings

Charlotte Lozier Institute  

In 2013, the Charlotte Lozier Institute published a report titled, “The Adoption Tax Credit: Progress and Prospects for Expansion.” The report both outlines the history of the adoption tax credit at the federal level and analyzes the number of states that provide some form of tax relief for adoption. Since the report was published, the federal adoption tax credit has continued to increase in dollar amount and is utilized by tens of thousands of Americans pursuing adoption each year. In addition, several states have created or expanded adoption tax credits at the state level, helping to offset adoption costs for American families.

Planned Parenthood: “Irreplaceable” and “Lifesaving”?

Charles A. “Chuck” Donovan, James Studnicki, Sc.D., MPH, MBA   

In its most recent annual report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America makes two fundamental claims, both of which are directly relevant to the question involving continued government funding for its services, approximately $555 million in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. These claims are:

• First, that Planned Parenthood health centers are “an irreplaceable component of our country’s healthcare system”, and;
• Second, that Planned Parenthood provides “lifesaving care.”

Pregnancy Help Centers Win Another Legal Victory in Struggle Against Oppressive Regulations

Thomas M. Messner, J.D.  

Pregnancy help centers (PHCs) have won a victory in their struggle against oppressive regulations.

At issue is a 2016 Illinois law regulating physicians and other health care personnel. Plaintiffs, including the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), challenged the law, arguing, in the words of a federal district court, that it “compels [PHCs] to tell pregnant women the names of other doctors they believe offer abortions, and compels them to tell pregnant women that abortion has ‘benefits’ and is a ‘treatment option’ for pregnancy.”

Netherlands Forcible Euthanasia Case and the Slippery Slope

Eugene C. Tarne, Caroline Savoie   

Proponents of assisted suicide often dismiss “slippery slope” arguments on the grounds that proper safeguards will assure that assisted suicide will not devolve into euthanasia, either voluntary or not.

Earlier this year, for example, Hawaii became another of several states to consider legislation to legalize assisted suicide (the effort failed).  During debate, one lawmaker who supported the bill dismissed concerns over where legalization might lead, saying “the inclusion of protections, such as euthanasia bans, helps allay the fears of critics who worry about the ‘slippery slope.’”

Oregon Lawmakers Promote Abortion, Crush Civil Liberty, and Hate on Social Justice

Thomas M. Messner, J.D.  

Oregon lawmakers have passed a bill that would force health benefit plans offered in the state to provide coverage for abortion and voluntary sterilization.

The bill, known as HB 3391, also would require health benefit plans to cover any contraceptive drug, device, or product approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. As this Lozier paper explains, some contraceptives can also cause abortions.

Charlie Gard’s Case and Parental Advocacy for Chronically Ill Children

Katherine Rafferty, Ph.D., M.A.  

“My biggest issue is this: a parent is a caregiver and then of course the health professionals are the caregivers, but you know, who gets the final say?”

-Mother whose daughter has osteosarcoma

This essential question was posed by the mother of one of 33 children living with chronic conditions whose parents I interviewed for my recently published study in the current issue of Health Communication. The study is titled, “You know the medicine, I know my kid”: How parents advocate for their children living with complex chronic conditions.

Ad Campaign Ruling Highlights Needs for Outreach and Healing

Moira Gaul, M.P.H.  

Last December a Canadian appeals judge ruled against the appearance of a provocative pro-life ad campaign on the exterior of municipal buses in Grand Prairie, Alberta.[1] Justice C. S. Anderson stated in her decision, “Expression of this kind may lead to emotional responses from the various people who make use of public transit and other uses of the road, creating a hostile and uncomfortable environment.”

Written Testimony of Sheila Page, D.O., in Support of Texas Bill to Prohibit Dismemberment Abortions

Sheila Page, D.O.  

On Wednesday, February 15, 2017, the Texas Committee of Health and Human Services held a hearing regarding Texas Senate Bill 415 (SB 415). SB 415 prohibits dismemberment abortions, in which a person, with the purpose of causing the death of an unborn child, dismembers the unborn child and extracts the unborn child one piece at a time from the uterus. Charlotte Lozier Institute Associate Scholar Sheila Page, D.O., submitted the following written testimony in support of SB 415.

Written Testimony of George Delgado, M.D., F.A.A.F.P., in Support of Colorado Abortion Pill Reversal Bill

Charlotte Lozier Institute  

On Thursday, February 9, 2017, the Colorado House Health, Insurance and Environment Committee held a hearing regarding House Bill 1086 (HB 1086), the Abortion Pill Reversal Information Act. HB 1086 provides that prior to initiating a chemical abortion, a physician must alert the woman to the fact that it may be possible to reverse the abortion should she change her mind and that information on the possibility of reversal is available in state-prepared materials.

Written Testimony of Tara Sander Lee, Ph.D., in Support of Texas Bill to Prohibit Human Fetal Tissue Research

Tara Sander Lee, Ph.D.  

On Wednesday, February 15, 2017, the Texas Committee of Health and Human Services held a hearing regarding Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8). SB 8 prohibits partial-birth abortions, prohibits donation of human fetal tissue except by certain authorized facilities to accredited universities, and prohibits the purchase or sale of human fetal tissue. Charlotte Lozier Institute Associate Scholar Tara Sander Lee, Ph.D., submitted the following written testimony in support of SB 8.

A Person’s a Person: Inconsistent Treatment of the Unborn in the Law

  

Women in the United States have possessed a broad legal right to abortion since Roe v. Wade and its companion case were handed down by the Supreme Court in 1973. Outside of the abortion context, though, the unborn child possesses broad legal rights in American property, torts, and criminal law.

Alabama Supreme Court Rules in Support of Unborn Life

  

Kimberly Stinnett learned from her obstetrician on May 9, 2012, that she was pregnant. Stinnett called her doctor’s answering service just two days later when she experienced fever and abdominal cramps. Karla Kennedy, M.D., called back and told Stinnett to report to the emergency room at a nearby hospital. Kennedy was not Stinnett’s regular obstetrician, but was sharing calls with him that weekend.

Lawsuit Filed Against New Mexico Abortion Center

  

Jessica Duran underwent an abortion at Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO), an abortion center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in October 2012. Last week she filed a lawsuit against the abortion center and its licensed physicians in Second Judicial District Court for the County of Bernalillo.

Fetal Disposition: The Abuses and The Law

Kristi Burton Brown, J.D.  

With roughly 1.06 million abortions in the nation every year, abortion facilities have a need to dispose of approximately 2,700 baby bodies every day. This paper will examine the problems that occur when laws fail to hold abortion clinics accountable and when the clinics are allowed to choose methods of disposal that most benefit their businesses. It will also suggest a variety of changes that could be made to state laws to end some of the dangerous practices of the abortion industry.

What Happens Next If Roe Is Overturned?

  

A legislator in Indiana has announced plans to introduce a bill that would ban abortion in that state when its legislature convenes in January. In Texas, lawmakers introduced several pro-life measures on November 14, including a proposed amendment to the state constitution prohibiting abortion to the extent permitted by federal law.

Planned Parenthood Takes Aim at Indiana Ultrasound Law

  

A federal judge heard arguments on November 9 on Planned Parenthood’s challenge to an Indiana law requiring that an ultrasound be performed on a woman seeking an abortion at least 18 hours before the abortion is scheduled to take place.

Baby;s feet

The Future of Pro-Life Legislation and Litigation

Tim Bradley  

The legal system since Roe v. Wade and through Planned Parenthood v. Casey has neglected to ask the question about the consequences of fetal personhood, fearing—rightly—the damage the answer could do to the right to abortion. But this insulation of abortion rights leaves the courts unable to rule consistently in a variety of cases where the fetal right to life has become lodged in law.

Fact Sheet: Federal Funding Restrictions on Abortion

Charlotte Lozier Institute  

In the years leading up to and following the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade legalizing abortion nationwide, the federal government—primarily Congress—has enacted various measures governing the availability of federal funds for abortion and related services.

Protecting Life, Not Punishing Women

  

The treatment of women seeking abortions has arisen several times during the ongoing election cycle. Some abortion advocates claim that pro-lifers want to punish women seeking abortion. They argue that women were punished for having abortions before Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973, and that if Roe is repealed women will once again be subject to punishment.

Assisted Suicide Considered in the Nation’s Capital

Genevieve Plaster, M.A.  

On October 5, the District of Columbia’s Committee on Health and Human Services (HHS) will mark-up and vote on a bill to legalize physician-assisted suicide. The so-called “Death with Dignity Act” (Bill 21-0038) would permit D.C. adult residents to request and be prescribed drugs to end their lives, if they are given a prognosis of six months or less to live. Last year, during a hearing on the legislation, the Director of D.C.’s Department of Health testified in staunch opposition as the executive witness, stating that the bill would “catapult the District into unchartered territories.”

March for Life Announces 2017 Theme: “The Power of One”

Charlotte Lozier Institute  

Last Thursday, the March for Life hosted a Capitol Hill policy briefing to announce their theme for 2017: “The Power of One.” The event also highlighted the importance of the Hyde Amendment, featuring Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) senior policy analyst, Genevieve Plaster, M.A. and CLI associate scholar, Michael J. New, Ph.D. who provided policy background and explained the law’s measurable impact over the past 40 years.

A Time for Choosing in Colorado

  

Voters in Colorado will determine whether physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is to be legalized in their state when they head to the polls this November. California, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont are the only other states that have voted to allow physicians to assist their patients in committing suicide. In Montana, the practice was legalized via a state court decision.

Baby

Ireland High Court: Unborn Child Has Rights “Beyond the Right to Life Alone”

Nora Sullivan, M.P.A  

Earlier this month in Ireland, a High Court judge ruled that the unborn child possesses “significant” rights by common law, by statute, and under the Irish Constitution. Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys went on to say that the unborn child enjoys rights “going well beyond the right to life alone” and that these rights “must be taken seriously” by the State.

Give Me Liberty and Give Me Death?

  

Death by euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide is primed to take off in Canada, as Parliament passed Bill C-14 on June 17. The law, which establishes guidelines under which Canadians can receive assistance in killing themselves or be euthanized by medical personnel, received royal assent the same day. Royal assent can be supplied by the Governor General and does not denote approval by Buckingham Palace.

Education, Not Propaganda

  

Abortion ends the life of a unique human being. Children in Oklahoma public schools will learn that lesson beginning this fall.

MI state flag

New Michigan Laws Deter and Punish Coerced Abortion

  

Proponents of abortion are all about “choice.” Yet in many cases, it seems, a woman’s decision to procure an abortion does not feel like much of a choice at all.

The best estimates indicate that somewhere between 30 to over 60 percent of women seeking abortions in the United States do so under pressure—from the father of her child, her parents, her family members, friends, or employer. One study shows that up to 64 percent of women who had undergone an abortion reported that they were pressured to do so. What can be done to counteract this phenomenon of coerced abortions? Coerced abortions are especially harmful to women—not only does the voice of the unborn child, who cannot plead on his own behalf, go unheard, but also the voice of the mother is muted by outside pressure.

meeting

Three Life Policies that Challenge Supreme Court Abortion Standards

Thomas M. Messner, J.D.  

Today I’m going to talk about three legal policies involving life protections for unborn children. I’m going to explain how each of these policies could actually be upheld under current Supreme Court abortion precedent. However, at the same time, each of these policies represents a serious challenge to current Supreme Court abortion standards by forcing the Court to consider and, hopefully, uphold policies that narrow the abortion right and call into question its continued legitimacy. But first, let’s step back and consider three basic points that help us put pro-life legislative initiatives into context.

CLI amicus brief cover

Lozier Institute Files Brief in Support of Daleiden & Center for Medical Progress

Charles A. “Chuck” Donovan  

The Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) and Americans United for Life (AUL) recently filed an amicus brief in a major lawsuit over the late-term abortion videotapes collected by the Center for Medical Progress (CMP). This lawsuit involves a vital public policy question: Can an association of abortion providers like the National Abortion Federation (NAF) successfully block the release of videos that show members of their organization potentially engaged in encouraging, supporting or facilitating the acquisition and/or sale of body parts from the unborn during the abortion process?

New CLI Scholar to Testify at “Pricing of Fetal Tissue” Congressional Hearing

Catherine Glenn Foster, J.D., M.A.  

On April 20, the U.S. House of Representatives’ Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives will hold a hearing on “The Pricing of Fetal Tissue” in response to information brought forth by the Center for Medical Progress’ undercover video exposé.

Charlotte Lozier Institute’s new associate scholar Catherine Glenn Foster, J.D. has been invited to testify as an attorney on the federal statutes governing fetal tissue research. Below is a preview of her testimony.

Prolife witnesses with Rep. Trent Franks

Testimony of CLI Assoc. Scholar in Support of the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act

Anna Higgins, J.D.  

On April 14, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on HR 4924, the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA) of 2016, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks. The bill would prohibit discrimination against the unborn based on the preference of sex or race alone. Charlotte Lozier Institute associate scholar Anna Higgins, J.D. testified in support of the bill, and summarized her newly published paper on sex-selection abortion.

Compassion, Not Punishment, for Women Who Have Had Abortion

Genevieve Plaster, M.A.  

Yesterday, during an MSNBC townhall event with Chris Matthews, presidential candidate Donald Trump was asked if he believes in “punishment for abortion” to which he replied that there should be “some form of punishment.” When asked whether this applied to women who have had abortions, Mr. Trump replied in the affirmative, though he later clarified that he believes only abortionists should be held accountable.

Pro-life groups have quickly, and with a united voice, used this incident to clarify that the pro-life movement has never advocated, in any context, for the punishment of women who undergo abortion, but rather acknowledges that abortion harms and exploits women.