Monday, August 13, 2012

Appeals Court Violates U.S. Constitution: Stops MURDER ban

A Pro-Life organization that I strongly support is LIFE DECISIONS INTERNATIONAL!

Its website is at:

I recently received word that five companies have agreed to no longer provide funds to Planned MURDERHOOD!!! This program does work! Keep PRAYING and keep doing! deals with the immoral, sinful agenda of homosexual activists. deals with the MURDER of the unborn. will continue with political discussions based upon Christian values.

Sign up for the virtual Tea Party rally and march at the Republican National Convention if you can’t make it in person!

Sign the “Life at Conception” Petition! Force Democrats to vote to show their position on the continuing MURDER of unborn children!

Petition to protect voting rights of members of the military:

Almost every day (sometimes not on Saturday and Sunday) the judges and Justices in the federal court system violate the U.S. Constitution. Here is a recent example!


“Appeals Court Stops Arizona Fetal-Pain Based Abortion Ban

by Steven Ertelt
Phoenix, AZ
8/1/12 5:22 PM

Two days after a federal judge issued a lengthy opinion based on Supreme Court case law upholding an Arizona ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy based on fetal pain, a federal appeals court approved an injunction preventing it from taking effect.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (A notoriously corrupt court!—my addition) issued a preliminary injunction that will block the Arizona law from taking effect this week and stopping late abortions.

The pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights and the ACLU filed an emergency appeal after the ruling by the federal judge okayed the law. The appellate court blocked the law while it considers the underlying legal challenge to its constitutionality.

Today we have won a critical victory,’ CRR president Nancy Northup said in a statement praising the decision. ‘We will continue this battle now to ensure that the private and personal decisions of Arizona women are not subject to arbitrary and dangerous restrictions advanced by an extreme anti-choice agenda (The choice is to MURDER or not MURDER their own child! Those are the ONLY two choices possible! And they have no Constitutionalrightto MURDER their child and certainly NO moralrightto MURDER their own child!—my addition).’

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Steven Aden responded to LifeNews, saying: ‘Every innocent life deserves to be protected. Not only does this law protect children in the womb who experience horrific pain during a late-term abortion, it also protects mothers from the dangers and tremendous psychological consequences of late-term abortions. Though the 9th Circuit’s stay is regrettable, all it has done (All its done is continue the MURDER epidemic in this nation!—my addition) is give itself time to fully consider the case. Once it does, it should see the merits of the district court’s decision and uphold Arizona’s law.’

The ACLU sued to stop the law after legislators passed the bill to ban abortions after that period of time except in very rare cases of medical emergency. The bill also requires abortion facilities to allow women to have an ultrasound of their unborn baby at least 24 hours prior to having the abortion. In many cases women change their minds about a planned abortion after seeing the images of their developing child.

Against the best interests of the health and safety of Arizona’s women, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit to block the law from going into effect on August 2 as planned.

Judge James Teilborg’s ruling acknowledged prior Supreme Court rulings saying states may not prohibit abortions before viability. But he said the law ‘does not impose a substantial obstacle to previability abortions.’ He said state’s have a legitimate reason to protect unborn children during that time.

‘There is no question that the government may use its voice and its regulatory authority to show its profound respect for the life within the woman,’ he wrote, quoting from the Supreme Court case that upheld the federal ban on partial-birth abortions.

He also rejected pro-abortion arguments that the law prevents women from having abortions if the baby suffers from very severe abnormalities incompatible with life (What in the world does that mean! Some babies dontdeserveto live because they aredefective?” —my addition), saying evidence submitting court ‘stops short of claiming that there are any conditions that could only by diagnosed after 20 weeks that could not have been found before that time.’

‘The court finds that it would be extremely rare to find a condition that could be diagnosed after 20 weeks that could not have been diagnosed earlier,’ he wrote.

The judge also did not go along with pro-abortion arguments that a diagnosis of fetal abnormalities will not occur until after 20 weeks and, even if a mother is prevented from having an abortion in such a case, he said ‘such a situation cannot be the basis of the court’s decision in a facial challenge to the statute.’

One purpose of the bill was to prevent abortions when unborn children feel pain and the judge was sympathetic to the legislature’s intent, saying lawmakers cited ‘substantial and well-documented evidence that an unborn child (By the court's own admission, this is a CHILD!!!—my addition) has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks gestational age.’

Quote from the court’s order (Isaacson v. Horne):

‘Given the nature of D&Es and induction abortions …, and the finding that the unborn child has developed pain sensors all over its body by 20 weeks gestational age, this Court concludes that the State has shown a legitimate interest in limiting abortions past 20 weeks gestational age. Further, in promulgating H.B. 2036, Arizona expressed concerns for the health of the pregnant woman, finding that the instance of complications is highest after twenty weeks of gestation. This additional legitimate interest further supports H.B. 2036’s regulation on abortions after 20 weeks gestational age …. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiffs cannot succeed on the merits of their claim that H.B. 2036 is unconstitutional ….’

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Steven Aden talked with LifeNews about the initial ruling:

‘Every innocent life deserves to be protected. That certainly includes the most vulnerable of all: children in the womb who experience horrific pain when being torn apart in the womb during a late-term abortion like those this law prohibits. This law also protects mothers from dangerous late-term abortions and their tremendous psychological consequences. The ACLU and the Center for Reproductive Rights, who filed this lawsuit, apparently don’t care about any of that, preferring to pursue their own agenda. The court was right to thwart their attempts to stop this law.’

The Center for Arizona Policy helped draft HB 2036, known as the Mother’s Health and Safety Act, and testified in support of the bill and complained when the ACLU sued.

‘Once again, we see supposed ‘pro-woman’ organizations fight to protect abortion-on-demand despite the serious risks abortion presents to new moms,’ said Cathi Herrod, President of Center for Arizona Policy. ‘The medical evidence presented during committee hearings make it clear that abortions after 20 weeks present a much greater risk to the life of the women. There is also substantial medical evidence that preborn children can feel pain at this age.’

‘Center for Arizona Policy is committed to seeing this law take effect. Americans support common sense standards that protect women from the dangerous practices of the abortion industry,’ Herrod said.”

Once again for those obviously illiterate members of the federal courts (or maybe they have just forgotten what the Constitution actually says or maybe they don’t care.) who don’t know the plain words of the U.S. Constitution:


Article III, Section 2, §2:

“In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

Look it up if you don’t believe me but this is the Constitutional provision.

“In ALL Cases … in which a State shall be Party (The State in this case being the State of Arizona—my addition), the supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.” This IS the Constitutional requirement!

Roe vs. Wade and all similar cases were ALL first heard in a federal district court. Therefore, the decisions in ALL those cases are NOT valid because the cases DID NOT originate in the supreme Court as required by law—the Constitution of the United States. The decision in this case is NOT valid because this case did NOT originate in the supreme Court.

The State of Arizona has NO Constitutional necessity to obey the ruling of this court. Every State should DEMAND that the Constitution be followed. If it is NOT, they should refuse to obey the illegal dictates of a lower federal court. The lower federal courts have NO Constitutional jurisdiction over a State. NONE! NONE!! NONE!!! NONE!!!! NONE!!!!!