Life Advocacy Briefing

Question of the Week

TO BE POSED TO ADVOCATES OF ABORTION: If a “product of conception” has all the DNA components of a human being, how can he or she be anything other than an unborn child?

Watch Out!

SITTING ON THE DESK OF ILLINOIS GOV. J.B. PRITZKER (D) is a proposal, HB-3637, which would, reports Robert Jones for LifeSiteNews, “keep abortion pills legal in the state – even if the FDA finds them unsafe – by deferring instead to the World Health Organization (WHO).”

The deadly measure was sent to the governor on June 24. Under the state constitution, he has 60 days in which either to sign or veto the bill or send it back to the legislature with amendments for further legislative action. If he fails or refuses to act, the bill becomes law without his signature.

Intended to legalize mifepristone in Illinois regardless of potential federal action to withdraw it from US markets, the bill, notes Mr. Jones, “would protect any drug approved by the FDA before Jan. 1, 2025, so long as it remains recommended by the WHO, even if the FDA later revokes that approval. The WHO has a long record of supporting abortion and population control efforts.”

Pro-life Illinois citizens would do well to contact the governor at 217/782-6830 to ask that he veto HB-3637 out of concern that such a law could expose Illinois residents to dangerous or untested drugs. Mentioning mifepristone or “the abortion drug” would not be helpful, as Gov. Pritzker is notorious for his advocacy of abortion.

Readers from other states would do well to watch for similar legislation to pop up.

Texas Tightening Screws on Abortionists Near & Far

TEXAS LAWMAKERS ARE SEEKING TO TIGHTEN the state’s already successful legislation driving surgical abortuaries out of business by seeking to protect babies targeted by abortion poison as well.

“The latest version of the ‘Women & Child Protection Act’ (WCPA), which was heard [Aug. 11] in the State Senate,” reports Carole Novielli for Live Action, “would … allow citizens to sue those who manufacture, distribute or prescribe abortion pills [and also] to file a wrongful death lawsuit if abortion pills result in ‘harm or death’ to an unborn child or the mother.

“In addition,” Ms. Novielli notes, “the Texas attorney general would be able to sue on behalf of unborn children of Texans.

“According to CBS News,” reports the Live Action writer, “the legislation also aims to counteract shield laws in other states designed to legally protect those who distribute abortion pills to states such as Texas where they are illegal.” Such action is needed because the federal government is refusing to get involved even though abortion-tolerant states, like New York, are overtly shielding pill pushers who prey on vulnerable mothers and their children in states like Texas, where abortion is illegal.

Taking the civil liability route not only puts abortionists at risk of major lawsuits but also jeopardizes their ability to secure malpractice insurance coverage. The Texas law has already shown stunning success in closing abortuaries, and this measure to extend coverage to chemical pill pushers shows great promise as well.

Bay State Shielding Abortionists

MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MAURA HEALEY (D) HAS SIGNED a law strengthening state protections for her states’ abortionists to peddle their poisons across state lines, reports Calvin Freiburger for LifeSiteNews, “to help other states’ residents get around restrictions on abortion and ‘gender transitions.’

“An enhancement to a previously enacted law, the Shield Act 2.0 more explicitly authorizes abortions,” writes Mr. Freiburger, “for supposed ‘medical necessity’ and bans state and local authorities from cooperating with federal or out-of-state officials on investigations pertaining to any ‘health’ services that are legal in Massachusetts.

“It also declares,” he writes, “that the names of ‘individuals engaged in the provision, facilitation or promotion of reproductive healthcare services’ or ‘gender-affirming healthcare services shall not be considered a public record,’ meaning they would not have to be shared with law enforcement counterparts and could be left off the labels of abortion pills shipped to other states. …

“‘No one,’” said Gov. Healey, quoted by LifeSiteNews, “‘is going to prevent the people of Massachusetts from getting the health care they need.’” Though, of course, that is not what this new law does; rather, it interferes with law enforcement efforts in other states seeking to protect the lives of their own.

C.J. Doyle, the state’s Catholic League’s executive director, responded, writes Mr. Freiburger, “‘Mifepristone kills unborn children and in as many as one in 10 cases causes adverse medical complications for the women who use it.’” He went on to call the legislation “‘legislative license for Bay State abortionists to violate the laws of other American states while being shielded from any criminal prosecution, civil liability or professional discipline.’”

Closer Look at Surrogacy Overdue

FLORIDA’s ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES UTHMEIER (R) IS RESPONDING to the shocking revelation earlier this month that a Pennsylvania sex offender had obtained a child through surrogacy. He is planning, reports Emily Washburn for The Daily Citizen, to file a bill in 2026 to tighten regulation of surrogate parenting in his state.

Here is the disturbing background, which should prompt Mr. Uthmeier’s counterparts to act on behalf of their own citizens and should prompt citizens across America to demand attention by their own lawmakers.

A man in Pennsylvania named Brandon Keith Mitchell, reports Ms. Washburn, “and his [so-called] partner, a man named Logan Riley, had no problem gaining full parental rights over a newborn in 2023 via a gestational surrogacy contract.” This despite Mr. Mitchell’s 2016 “conviction of felony child porn possession and corruption of a minor … after he sexually abused a 16-year-old [who] was a student at the high school where Mitchell taught chemistry.”

The district attorney of the county where the pair live, notes Ms. Washburn, “told Newsweek the pair took advantage of a massive loophole in state laws governing surrogacy contracts. ‘Pennsylvania law currently does not, in and of itself, prohibit a registered sex offender from becoming a parent through surrogacy,’ he explained. This means that the baby cannot be removed from Mitchell’s care based on his prior convictions. What’s more,” writes Ms. Washburn, “Pennsylvania recognizes Mitchell as the child’s parent, making it considerably harder for state actors to intervene.”

That loophole is not confined to Pennsylvania. It appears that surrogacy laws have received little attention while the industry continues to grow as part of America’s shameful sexual revolution.

In Florida, for example, “the only pre-requisite to entering a gestational surrogacy contract – an agreement to grow and purchase a child,” writes Ms. Washburn, “is that all parties be at least 18 years old. …

“Lack of surrogacy regulation in states like Florida and Pennsylvania,” notes the Daily Citizen, “reflect our culture’s mistaken conception of surrogacy: That it’s a pro-family technology helping couples struggling with infertility to have biological children.”

If that sounds to readers like the misplaced sympathy offered to in vitro fertilization, it very well might. And it clearly needs intervention by clear-thinking lawmakers and officials like A.G. Uthmeier.

Left-over

YOUR EDITOR HAS FOUND some research “fodder” that did not make it into Life Advocacy Briefing but is too good to leave out. From time to time, we will be offering an item under the “Left-over” title that, yes, is dated but is timeless. Below is our first such item.

From a 1994 amicus curiae brief filed with the Supreme Court by the late Mother Teresa:

“America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father’s role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts – a child – as a competitor, an intrusion and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters. And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners. … Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being’s entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign.”

Sadly, this is still true even in the aftermath of the official rejection of Roe. Without a spiritual revival and awakening, Roe’s fallout is still upon America.

Wrong on Every Count

Aug. 8, 2025, The Washington Stand report by Sarah Holliday

             In what has become a chilling unearthing, Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) in Virginia has launched an investigation into Centreville High School for accusations of arranging and funding students’ abortions back in 2021. The news, first revealed by the W.C. Dispatch Substack, has sparked outrage among parents, pro-life advocates and concerned citizens, raising serious questions about parental rights and school overreach.

             According to reporting from local news outlet WJLA, one of the two girls involved was only 17 years old. The report went into further detail: “One girl underwent the procedure at 17; the other, five months pregnant and pleading to keep her baby, bolted from the clinic after social worker Carolina Diaz allegedly told her she ‘had no choice.’ Principal Chad Lehman, the girls insist, knew – and taxpayers footed the bill. … A handwritten statement from the first student, translated for clarity, lays out how Diaz scheduled the appointment, paid the clinic’s fees and swore her to secrecy.

             “That alone would be enough to raise the hair on the back of a patriotic taxpayer’s neck, but there is more. A second Centreville minor, five months pregnant and wavering, was allegedly told by the same social worker that she ‘had no other choice.’ The girl, terrified, ultimately bolted from the clinic rather than go through with the procedure. She later confided in her teacher, Mrs. Zenaida Perez, who allowed her name to be used on the record and provided The WC Dispatch a recording of the family confirming that no one at the school had ever informed them of the intent to terminate their daughter’s pregnancy. I have reviewed the audio in full and verified its content. It’s heartbreaking.”

             FCPS claims it had no prior knowledge of these actions but has launched an immediate investigation. Supt. Michelle Reid addressed the allegations in a letter, stating, “I want to stress that at no time, would the situation as described in these allegations be acceptable in Fairfax County Public Schools.”

             Notably, Virginia state law requires parental consent and notification for minors seeking abortions. Additionally, the school in question has a policy that states “Every effort shall be made to encourage and support students suspecting pregnancy to discuss their concerns with their parents or guardians.” And while the policy does not require staff to tell the parents, it does say that “in no case shall personnel commit themselves to maintain such information confidentially, keeping it from parents, guardians or appropriate school authorities.”

             Several pro-life groups have responded to the allegations against Centreville High School. 40 Days for Life wrote on X, “A Fairfax high school secretly arranged and paid for student abortions without telling parents. This isn’t ‘health care.’ It’s state-funded child exploitation. Every official involved must be held accountable.” Concerned Women for America described the situation as “an absolutely outrageous affront to parental rights.”

             The initial Substack itself concluded as follows: “Parents across Virginia must now stare that question in the eye – and demand answers – because unless swift accountability follows, an unmarked door in Fairfax will stand as a grim reminder that parental rights, the backbone of any free republic, can be pushed to the curb with a sly smile and a deadbolt.”

             Mary Szoch, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity, described the events as a tragedy for the students, a violation of parental rights and a grave overstep by the school. “Public schools cannot and should not take the place of parents,” she told The Washington Stand. “When a teenager finds out she is pregnant, her parents should know so that they can be there to provide loving support for both her and their grandchild, who is growing in her womb.”

             Szoch continued, “Schools not informing parents, and worse, paying for the killing of a teenager’s unborn child, is horrific. The school officials who did this should be held accountable. Schools cannot take the place of parents, and when they try to, children get hurt. In this case, a teenager will now live with the pain and regret that follows an abortion, and the world will never know her unborn baby,” She concluded, “Let’s pray for these moms to know God.”

One State Doing It Mostly Right

Aug. 13, 2025, Daily Citizen report by Zachary Mettler

             A state appeals court has upheld Indiana’s pro-life law, handing abortion giant Planned Parenthood a defeat in its attempt to kill preborn children in Indiana. The ruling is a massive victory for Life.

             After the US Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision in 2022, Indiana passed SB-1, prohibiting abortions in all but three circumstances: 1. When an abortion is necessary either to save the woman’s life or to prevent a serious health risk to her (a/k/a the Life or Health Exception*); 2. When there is a lethal fetal anomaly*; 3. When the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest*.

             According to the attorney general’s office, in the limited number of cases where abortion is permitted, it must be performed in a hospital or ambulatory surgical center (the Hospital Requirement) – not an abortion clinic like Planned Parenthood.**

             The Indiana House passed the bill on Aug. 5, 2022, in a 62-38 vote. On the same day, the State Senate approved the bill in a 28-19 vote, and former Gov. Eric Holcomb [R] signed it into law.

             After the Indiana General Assembly enacted SB-1, Planned Parenthood and other abortion sellers in the state challenged the abortion ban, arguing that Article 1, Section 1 of the Indiana Constitution, which provides that “all people” are endowed “with certain inalienable rights,” including “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” thereby contained a right to abortion. The Indiana Supreme Court subsequently rejected that argument, holding that Art. 1, Sec. 1 only protects a woman’s “right” to an abortion “that is necessary to protect her life or to protect her from a serious health risk.”

             In response, Planned Parenthood amended its complaint, arguing instead that “there are numerous, specific circumstances in which the life or health of a woman is at serious risk by a pregnancy, but the abortion ban would appear to prohibit a woman in those circumstances from obtaining an abortion to resolve those risks.” Furthermore, the abortion providers challenged the statutory provision that requires any abortion to be performed at a licensed hospital or an ambulatory outpatient surgical center.

             On Monday, in a 31-page decision, the Court of Appeals of Indiana rejected Planned Parenthood’s amended arguments. “The constitutional right to an abortion under Article 1, Section 1 is limited to circumstances in which an abortion is the only reasonable medical option to protect a woman from a risk to her life or to protect her from a serious health risk,” the court explained. “The circumstances argued by the medical-care providers [sic] here do not necessitate an abortion to treat those risks.”

             The appeals court also upheld the Hospital Requirement, deciding it is not a “material burden on the constitutional right to an abortion” because in any “extreme medical scenario” where a woman’s life or health is at risk, such a procedure would nearly always be done in a hospital anyway.

             … “This ruling is a resounding victory for Life and the rule of law in Indiana,” the state’s Attorney General Todd Rokita said in a statement lauding the ruling. He added, “Our unwavering commitment to protecting the most vulnerable and upholding our state’s values will continue to guide this office. The overwhelming majority of Hoosiers stand with us in defending the sanctity of life and the health of women across our state.”

*Life Advocacy Briefing note: We do not condone such loopholes even when carefully drawn.

**Life Advocacy Briefing note: This “hospital-only” clause is a major key to driving out abortion.

Wisdom from the Great Communicator

EXCERPT #15 from Abortion & the Conscience of the Nation, 1983 treatise by then-President Ronald Reagan, published in Human Life Review, then as a hardcover book from Thomas Nelson Publishers

             Events have borne out the editorial in a California medical journal which explained three years before Roe v. Wade that the social acceptance of abortion is a “defiance of the long-held Western ethic of intrinsic and equal value for every human life regardless of its stage, condition or status.” Every legislator, every doctor, and every citizen needs to recognize that the real issue is whether to affirm and protect the sanctity of all human life, or to embrace a social ethic where some human lives are valued and others are not. As a nation, we must choose between the sanctity of life ethic and the “equality of life” ethic.