A petition calling to boycott Macy&#8217;s stores and refrain from watching this year&#8217;s Macy&#8217;s Thanksgiving Day Parade has garnered more than 40,500 signatories objecting to the event&#8217;s apparent transgender agenda.
The parade, set to take place in New York City, has generally been accepted as a family-friendly affair <a href="https://www.iloveny.com/blog/post/history-of-the-macys-thanksgiving-day-parade/#:~:text=Since%201924%2C%20the%20Macy%27s%20Thanksgiving,this%20beloved%20event%20through%20Manhattan." target="_blank" rel="noopener">viewed</a> by tens of millions of Americans each year. This year, however, two characters associated with the event&#8217;s performances are so-called non-binary or transgender.
&#8220;The non-binary and transgender extravaganza on display this Thanksgiving will be brought to you by Macy’s during their annually sponsored Thanksgiving Day Parade,&#8221; reads a <a href="https://onemillionmoms.com/current-campaigns/say-no-to-the-macy-s-thanksgiving-day-parade/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">petition</a> hosted by One Million Moms, a division of the American Family Association. &#8220;Unless they are forewarned about it, this year’s holiday parade will potentially expose tens of millions of viewers at home to the liberal LGBTQ agenda.&#8221;
&#8220;Performances showcased in the parade will include music from two Broadway musicals, &#8216;&amp; Juliet&#8217; and &#8216;Shucked&#8217;, both of which feature transgender and non-binary performers in major roles,&#8221; the petition says.
Notably, the Macy’s Thanksgiving Parade in 2021 featured a pop singer named Kim Petras, who&#8217;s been dubbed the “<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20200301191447/https://www.papermag.com/kim-petras-clarity-project-2639362951.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-testid="standard-link">world’s youngest transsexual</a>.&#8221;
President of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/alliance-defending-freedom-adf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (ADF), Kristen Waggoner, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/thousands-sign-petition-macys-non-binary-trans-extravaganza-planned-thanksgiving-day-parade" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reacted</a>, “Macy’s inclusion of a non-binary transgender character in a parade is just another example of an ideological war that’s being waged on families, and customers are saying they’ve had enough. But it seems that corporate brands that were once trusted just still aren’t getting the message.”
&#8220;Shame on Macy’s for promoting and sponsoring this type of entertainment,&#8221; the One Million Moms petition reads. &#8220;We still cannot trust Macy’s Dept. Store. It is clear that Macy’s does not have our children’s best interests in mind. Macy’s needs to know that trust must be earned, and once trust is lost, it is difficult to get back.&#8221;
As of Wednesday morning, the petition has 40,543 signatures.
&#8220;I do not agree with the LGBTQ agenda you are pushing on families during your Thanksgiving Day Parade,&#8221; reads a blurb aimed at those signing the petition. &#8220;My family and I will not watch this indoctrination. Since this event goes against our beliefs and values, Macy’s has left conservative and Christian families with no choice but to avoid the parade and its stores, even during the holiday season. My family will not support Macy’s; you have lost our trust.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
For Macy’s part, the department store is moving forward with the Thanksgiving Day events.
“For nearly 100 years, the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade has showcased the very best in entertainment, delighting Americans everywhere with the most popular music acts, the best of Broadway, our country’s finest marching bands and dance teams, and giant balloons and floats that capture your imagination,” a Macy’s spokesperson said in a statement, National Review <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/macys-to-proceed-with-non-binary-performers-in-thanksgiving-parade-despite-petition/#:~:text=“For%20nearly%20100%20years%2C%20the,capture%20your%20imagination%2C”%20a%20Macy%27s" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> Tuesday.
“Every performer and volunteer is there with one mission — to entertain millions of spectators and kick off the holiday season. We look forward to celebrating this iconic Thanksgiving tradition again&#8230;,” the spokesperson added. 
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-macys-pulls-all-chrissy-teigen-products-after-messages-show-how-she-bullied-teen-girl" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Report: Macy’s Pulls All Chrissy Teigen Products After Messages Show How She Bullied Teen Girl</a>

Tom Turkey by Macy’s float is waiting for the parade to start during 96th Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade on November 24, 2022 in New York City.

‘Non-Binary And Transgender Extravaganza’: Tens Of Thousands Boycotting Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, Department Store

Tens Of Thousands Boycotting Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade Over 'Liberal LGBTQ Agenda'

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Business

Macy's

nonbinary

Parade

Social Issues

Thanksgiving

Transgender

A Finnish politician who was on trial over her Christian beliefs on marriage and sexuality was found not guilty after the “hate crime” charges she faced were dismissed on Tuesday. 
Parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen faced state charges related to her sharing a 2019 tweet that included pictures of Bible verses,  a radio debate she had in 2019, and a pamphlet she wrote on marriage back in 2004. The Helsinki Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the charges and those faced by Bishop Juhana Pohjola, who published Räsänen&#8217;s 2004 pamphlet called “Male and Female He Created Them.”
“I am deeply relieved. The court has fully endorsed and upheld the decision of the district court, which recognized everyone’s right to free speech,” Räsänen <a href="https://adfinternational.org/breaking-finnish-parliamentarian-found-not-guilty-of-hate-speech-for-bible-tweet-and-other-expressions/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> after the court ruling was announced. 
Räsänen, a member of the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/finland" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Finnish</a> parliament, was supported in her defense by the Alliance Defending Freedom International. The prosecution must cover Räsänen’s legal bills according to the appeals court. 
“It isn’t a crime to tweet a Bible verse, or to engage in public discourse with a Christian perspective. The attempts made to prosecute me for expressing my beliefs have resulted in an immensely trying four years, but my hope is that the result will stand as a key precedent to protect the human right to free speech. I sincerely hope other innocent people will be spared the same ordeal for simply voicing their convictions,” Räsänen added. 
While Räsänen was unanimously acquitted by the District Court of Helsinki for the same charges back in March 2022, state prosecutors sought to appeal the lower court’s ruling earlier this year. 
The appeals court said that it had “no reason, on the basis of the evidence received at the main hearing, to assess the case in any respect differently from the District Court. There is therefore no reason to alter the final result of the District Court’s judgment.”  
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/black-friday-gift-guide" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE BLACK FRIDAY SHOPPING GUIDE</a>
During the case, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/finnish-politician-back-in-court-for-criminal-interpretation-of-bible-verses" target="_blank" rel="noopener">prosecutors argued</a> that they “can limit freedom of expression in the outward expression of religion.” They also said that the 2019 tweet was criminal because of Räsänen’s interpretation of the verse. “You can cite the Bible, but it is Räsänen’s interpretation and opinion about the Bible verses that are criminal,” one prosecutor said.  
Paul Coleman, the executive director of ADF International, celebrated the ruling but added that hate speech laws were dangerous for societies. 
“While we celebrate this monumental victory, we also remember that it comes after four years of police investigations, criminal indictments, prosecutions, and court hearings. We applaud the Helsinki Court of Appeal’s ruling in this case, and we work towards the bigger victory when such ludicrous cases are no longer brought,” he said.

Screen Shot 2023-11-14 at 7.01.23 AM

Finnish Court Dismisses Hate Crime Charges Against Politician On Trial Over Christian Beliefs

Christianity

Finland

Free Speech

Hate Speech

Marriage

Sexuality

Over the summer, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-sides-with-christian-graphic-designer-who-refused-to-work-on-same-sex-weddings" target="_blank" rel="noopener">landmark victory</a> for free speech in <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/303-creative-v-elenis?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">303 Creative v. Elenis</a>. The court reaffirmed the bedrock First Amendment principle that the government may not compel Americans to speak a message that violates their beliefs. That freedom protects everyone, and all views — those that we like and those that we loathe.
But it’s one thing to acknowledge these truisms, it’s another thing to apply them. That is now the responsibility of lower courts across the country. And it’s our responsibility, as citizens, to safeguard this cherished freedom.
In 303 Creative, the Supreme Court held that Colorado could not misuse a law to compel graphic designer Lorie Smith to design custom websites that celebrate a view of marriage that violates her beliefs. That decision rightly resolved a critical legal question that had been percolating in lower courts for years.
But many artists before Lorie endured a different outcome. And other artists are still waiting for courts to apply 303 Creative to prevent state or local governments from compelling their speech.
Ten years ago, the <a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/nm-supreme-court-price-citizenship-compromising-your-beliefs?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New Mexico Supreme Court</a> decided that a state law required photographer Elaine Huguenin to create photographs that contradicted her religious beliefs. That decision forced Elaine to close her business to avoid betraying her faith. Adding insult to injury, one New Mexico Supreme Court justice infamously told Elaine that sacrificing her beliefs was “the price of citizenship” in America.
Around that same time, cake artist Jack Phillips first drew the ire of Colorado officials. He was asked to create a custom wedding cake celebrating a same-sex wedding. Jack declined because that would have forced him to express a message about marriage he does not believe. Colorado sued him, and his case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, where justices <a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/us-supreme-court-rules-favor-colorado-cake-artist?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">criticized</a> state officials for demonstrating “a clear and impermissible hostility towards” Jack’s faith.
Undeterred, just a few days later, Colorado took legal action against Jack again. But the state quickly settled after evidence revealed Colorado’s ongoing hostility against Jack. Now, he’s in the midst of his third related lawsuit, which the <a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/colorado-supreme-court-takes-jack-phillips-free-speech-case?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Colorado Supreme Court will hear next year</a> .
Throughout the country, artists whose businesses and creations are inextricably connected to and guided by their faith found themselves bearing the weight of government coercion.
<a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/floral-artist-asks-us-supreme-court-protect-her-freedom?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Barronelle Stutzman</a>, a great-grandmother and custom floral artist from Washington, spent nearly 10 years standing for her constitutional rights. She eventually settled her case, which allowed her to retire with her conscience intact. Blaine Adamson, a promotional print shop owner, had to defend his freedom to design custom t-shirts consistent with his beliefs up to Kentucky’s Supreme Court. Along the way, he received vitriolic emails and calls. Large customers pulled their business, too. 
Many other artists — including <a href="https://adflegal.org/client/brush-nib-studio?__cf_chl_tk=lMuNoPKCpfzqa5op0eKt5GzOSgMMzgsYQ4HThjGUz1o-1698175632-0-gaNycGzNFCU?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">calligraphers</a>, <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/telescope-media-group-v-lucero?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">videographers</a>, and <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/amy-lynn-photography-studio-v-city-madison?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">photographers</a> — also took a stand to defend their freedom to create art reflecting their deeply held beliefs.
These artists have three things in common. First, they serve all people, including those who identify as LGBT. Their decisions to accept or decline a project always depend on the message they’re being asked to express, not on the identity of the person making the request.
Second, each artist has faced severe penalties for violating the law — devastating financial costs, mandatory educational programs, and jail time for declining to say something they don’t believe.
And third, each of them simply wants the freedom to create art that is consistent with their faith. Put differently, they desire the freedom to decide for themselves what messages to express through their art.
The 303 Creative decision assures them — and all Americans — of this right. But the implications of this ruling now come front and center in <a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/after-supreme-courts-landmark-free-speech-ruling-photographers-ky-ny-seek-also-create?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">two separate cases</a> that are currently on appeal.
These cases involve <a href="https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/ChelseyNelsonOnePageSummary.pdf?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Chelsey Nelson</a> and <a href="https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/CarpenterOnePageSummary.pdf?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Emilee Carpenter</a> who create photographs and write blogs that celebrate their belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Chelsey and Emilee are challenging local laws that would compel them to promote different views of marriage.
Both have asked their respective appellate courts to apply the same First Amendment protections affirmed in 303 Creative to their cases.
Their arguments go like this. Photographs and blogs are speech; they communicate ides. Chelsey and Emilee gladly serve people of all backgrounds, including those who identify as LGBT. Like most artists, there are some messages they can’t create, regardless of who asks. And 303 Creative held that the government cannot compel an artist to say something that contradicts their beliefs. That’s a right that runs to the soul of what it means to be an American.
It’s a right so many have sacrificed so much to preserve for their fellow citizens. May our nation’s best judges recognize the worth of that sacrifice – not as “the price of citizenship,” but as its highest privilege.
Bryan Neihart is legal counsel with <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Supreme Court of the United States 303 Creative v Elenis

After Landmark SCOTUS Ruling On Free Speech, More Artists Ask For Help In The Fight

Freedom of Religion

Readers Pass

SCOTUS

Supreme Court

A court ruled against a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/wisconsin" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Wisconsin</a> school district policy that allowed teachers and officials to address students by new names and pronouns without parental consent.
Waukesha Circuit County Court sided with two sets of parents in a Tuesday ruling against a Kettle Moraine School District policy that allowed school officials to refer to students by new names and pronouns without parental consent. The court ruled that the policy violated parental rights, saying parents should know about any changes.
“The School District could not administer medicine to a student without parental consent. The School District could not require or allow a student to participate in a sport without parental consent. Likewise, the School District cannot change the pronoun of a student without parental consent without impinging on a fundamental liberty interest of the parents,” <a href="https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/TF-Decision.pdf">wrote</a> Circuit Court Judge Michael Maxwell.
The case began after two sets of parents, represented by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty and the Alliance Defending Freedom, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/wisconsin-parents-sue-school-district-saying-that-educators-referred-to-their-daughter-with-male-pronouns-and-name-without-their-knowledge" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sued the school district</a> in November 2021 over the policy. 
One of the sets of parents said they took their 12-year-old daughter out of the Kettle Moraine school system after finding out that her teachers were referring to their daughter by a male name and using male pronouns without their knowledge. The girl ended up deciding to stop identifying as a boy. 
After protesting the matter, the parents say that the school cited its policy that said educators did not need parental consent to use a different pronoun or name than those given by the parents. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
“The School District abrogated the parental rights of [the parents] on how to medically treat [their child] when the district decided to socially affirm [the child] at school despite [the parents] requesting it does not. Through its policy of disregarding parental wishes on a medical or health related decision and with how fast questioning one&#8217;s gender can arise, [the parents] are at real risk of being harmed,” the court decision said. 
Lawyers for ADF and WILL celebrated the decision, saying it was a &#8220;major win for parental rights.&#8221; 
&#8220;The court confirmed that parents, not educators or school faculty, have the right to decide whether a social transition is in their own child’s best interests. The decision should be a warning to the many districts across the country with similar policies to exclude parents from gender transitions at school,” WILL deputy counsel Luke Berg <a href="https://will-law.org/will-adf-secure-groundbreaking-legal-victory-in-parental-rights-case/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>.

Photo of a blue metal lockers along a nondescript hallway in a typical US High School. No identifiable information included and nobody in the hall.

Parents Win Ruling Against Wisconsin School District Over Pronoun, Name Change Policy

Courts

Gender Pronouns

U.S.

Wisconsin

Throughout history, the greatest threat to free speech has always been authoritarian governments seeking to suppress dissent. That is still true today, even in America. Thankfully, a robust First Amendment has proved a necessary and valuable <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/missouri-v-biden-fifth-circuit-tech-censorship-white-house-covid-pandemic-86051c19" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bulwark</a> against censorious government autocrats. Historically, those on the political Left have proven to be some of the fiercest defenders of broad speech protections. Not so today. To be sure, many on the political Left still pay lip service to the notion of a strong First Amendment. But far too often, they do so while actively promoting ideologies that ultimately render those protections worthless.
The ongoing debate over males participating in female sports is a prime example. Radical activists regularly <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2023/04/21/riley-gaines-sfsu-growing-attack-free-speech-college-campuses/11695771002/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shout down and physically assault</a> anyone who dares to assert that men should not compete in women’s sports. The typical response from many leftists is to ignore the criminals committing violent acts against peaceful speakers. Instead, they blame the victim. They do so by advancing a noxious idea: the right to free speech does not protect anyone from the consequences of that speech. In other words, if someone does not like what you have to say, they have the right to punch you in the face, physically disrupt and shut down your speech, or chase you out of the room and restrain you in a room for hours while waiting for police protection.
This was the prevailing liberal response to a recent event held at the Mary L. Stevens Branch of the Yolo County Library. On August 20, Moms for Liberty – Yolo County, CA organized an event entitled “Forum for Fair and Safe Sport for Girls.” The event was scheduled to feature various speakers including Kim Jones, co-founder of Independent Council on Women’s Sports; Sophia Lorey, Outreach Coordinator at California Family Council and former collegiate athlete; Erin Friday, co-lead of Western Region of Our Duty-USA; and Allie Snyder, concerned mother and women’s rights advocate. 
Unfortunately, a library official shut down the event almost immediately. Why? Because one of the speakers used the phrase “men in women’s sports.” According to the official, California law prohibits use of the term “men” when referring to men who identify as women.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
California Public Library Silences Female Athlete <a href="https://t.co/dHYaxBFlr1">pic.twitter.com/dHYaxBFlr1</a>
&mdash; CA Family Council (@CAFamily) <a href="https://twitter.com/CAFamily/status/1693459291410497772?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 21, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
After video of the <a href="https://www.californiafamily.org/2023/08/california-public-library-silences-female-athlete/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">library shutting down</a> the event was shared on social media, the library allegedly received three separate bomb threats. The organizers of the event issued a statement denouncing the threats. They made clear that violence is never an appropriate response to speech you disagree with.
In response to this situation, the Sacramento Bee published an <a href="https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article278881104.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">op-ed</a>. The writer agreed that the organizers engaged in protected speech and that the library likely violated their First Amendment rights. Nevertheless, the writer asserted that the event organizers are responsible for the threats. How? Because the views espoused by the organizers are also allegedly held by the perpetrators of the bomb threats.
This is nonsensical. First, it is unfair to assume that the threats were made by someone sympathetic to the event. More importantly, no one is responsible (legally or morally) for another person’s unlawful actions simply because they may share similar views on certain topics. If this were true, Martin Luther King, Jr. would be responsible for all the violent acts of the Black Panther Party. That’s a ridiculous notion. But those advancing this argument are not worried about logic or reason. Regardless of their high-sounding rhetoric, their goal is the same as every other autocrat: shut down all dissent through whatever means necessary. Here, they conflate speech with violence in an attempt to shut down one side of the debate.
Our country’s history is rife with debates on all manner of controversial topics including slavery, women’s suffrage, prohibition, and numerous wars. Many on both sides of these debates undoubtedly advanced arguments that were offensive to the other side. Yet, we trusted previous generations to have the intelligence and strength of character to evaluate the merits of these crucial debates without claiming the other side’s speech was equivalent to violence.
I believe our country is better for having gone through the slow and painful process of debating controversial topics involving competing deeply held beliefs.
The same holds true for our current debates on essential topics such as immigration, climate change, abortion, freedom of speech, religious freedom, and gender identity. The outcome of these debates has the potential to significantly affect the life of every American, either for good or for ill. Exercising the God-given right to participate in these great debates is at the heart of what it means to be an American.
Tyson Langhofer serves as senior counsel and director of the Center for Academic Freedom at <a href="https://adflegal.org/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a>, which is representing Moms for Liberty – Yolo County, CA and the other speakers at the event.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Entrance of the college library

California Library Shuts Down Moms For Liberty Event Over Misgendering Trans Athletes

California

Gender Identity

Library

Transgender Athletes

Police in the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/united-kingdom" target="_blank" rel="noopener">United Kingdom</a> have dropped an investigation into a Christian woman who was arrested after silently praying outside of an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/abortion" target="_blank" rel="noopener">abortion</a> facility for allegedly violating a “buffer zone” law. 
West Midlands police told Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, who was arrested in December 2022 after praying outside an abortion facility in Birmingham, England in an area where protesting against abortion has been banned, that the charges against her have been dropped. 
“This isn’t 1984, but 2023 — I should never have been arrested or investigated simply for the thoughts I held in my own mind. Silent prayer is never criminal. I welcome West Midland Police’s decision to end their investigation and their apology for the time it took to do so, but it’s important to highlight the extremely harmful implications of this ordeal not just for myself, but for everyone concerned with fundamental freedoms in the UK. What happened to me signals to others that they too could face arrest, interrogation, investigation, and potential prosecution if caught exercising their basic freedom of thought,” Vaughan-Spruce said in a <a href="https://adf.uk/vindication-silent-prayer/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">statement</a>.
“Now that authorities have twice settled on the conclusion that silent prayer is not a crime – a conclusion also reached by the Home Secretary last week – I am thankful to resume my practice of praying silently for women in crisis pregnancies,” she added. 
In an email, police told Vaughan-Spruce that the “limitation of proceedings” were over and that they apologized “for the time this case has taken to come to this position,” <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12549117/Police-Catholic-woman-praying-offence-arrested-abortion-clinic-apologise.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to The Daily Mail. 
“There is now an urgent need for legal changes to stem the tide of policing by politics. We hope the decision from West Midlands Police that they will not prosecute free thought, alongside the Home Secretary’s public commitment to protecting silent prayer, will be reflected in legislation, guidance, and practice,” said Alliance Defending Freedom U.K. Attorney Jeremiah Igunnubole, who helped defend Vaughan-Spruce. 
The ordeal started <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/praying-woman-arrested-for-breaking-public-space-order-outside-u-k-abortion-clinic" target="_blank" rel="noopener">after authorities approached</a> Vaughan-Spruce outside the BPAS Robert Clinic in Kings Norton, Birmingham on December 6, 2022 after they received a complaint from someone about her presence, according to footage published by ADF U.K.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
“Are you standing here as part of a protest?” asked an officer.
“No, I’m not protesting,” Vaughan-Spruce said.
“Are you praying?” the police officer asked her.
“I might be praying in my head,” she replied.
On December 15, she was charged with four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order in so-called censorship zones, which authorities introduced to criminalize individuals appearing to be “engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or disapproval.”
Legislation is currently being debated in the U.K. that would extend a buffer zone 150 meters around abortion facilities. An amendment to exempt silent prayer and mutual conversations was defeated 299-116.

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce

Police Drop Investigation Into Woman Who Was Arrested For Praying Silently Outside Abortion Facility

Abortion

Religious Liberty

United Kingdom

World

The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/biden-administration" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Biden administration</a> has petitioned for the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court</a> to intervene against restrictions imposed on the chemical abortion drug mifepristone, claiming that limits on the drug are &#8220;damaging for women and healthcare providers around the Nation.”
In a legal filing on Friday, the Department of Justice <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-administration-supreme-court-take-major-abortion-pill-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> that the high court should not uphold limits placed on mifepristone that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-appeals-court-makes-decision-on-the-mailing-of-abortion-pills" target="_blank" rel="noopener">were set forth</a> by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that would prohibit the distribution of the pills through the mail or prescribed via telemedicine. The limits placed on the drug cannot be implemented until the Supreme Court issues a ruling on the decision. 
&#8220;The effect of the lower court&#8217;s decisions would be to compel FDA to return to a pre-2016 regulatory regime that imposes restrictions on distribution that FDA has found to be unnecessary and unjustified,&#8221; the DOJ said in a cert petition. 
The DOJ said that mifepristone, used in up to half of all abortions, was &#8220;best method&#8221; to end the life of an unborn child early in development. 
Danco Laboratories, the manufacturer of a widely used abortion pill, also <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/drugmaker-brings-abortion-pill-fight-to-supreme-court/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> in a Friday legal filing that the Supreme Court should throw out the Fifth Circuit’s limits on the drug. 
“For the women and teenage girls, health care providers, and States that depend on FDA’s actions to ensure safe and effective reproductive health care is available, this case matters tremendously,” wrote Jessica Ellsworth, a lawyer representing Danco. “And for the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry, permitting judicial second-guessing of FDA’s scientific evaluations of data will have a wildly destabilizing effect.”
The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom sued to stop the distribution and approval of the drug by the FDA. ADF lawyers have said that agency’s decision to approve mifepristone was political. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1693504018745000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1RMMjCvCBOBYdpkw5O_njE">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“The FDA’s unprecedented and unlawful actions did not reflect scientific judgment but rather revealed politically driven decisions to push a dangerous drug regimen without regard to women’s health or the rule of law. This is a significant victory for the doctors and medical associations we represent and, more importantly, the health and safety of women,” ADF Senior Counsel Erin Hawley said after the Fifth Circuit upheld restrictions of the drug last month. 
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the case in its coming fall session after previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-releases-decision-on-abortion-pill-mifepristone" target="_blank" rel="noopener">putting a stay</a> on a broader federal judge order to fully suspend approval for the pill.

US-ABORTION-DEMONSTRATION-SOCIAL-HEALTH-WOMEN

Biden Admin, Pharma Company Ask SCOTUS To Scrap Restrictions On Widely Used Abortion Pill

Abortion Drug

Biden Administration

Politics

The public school supply list includes everything a kid could possibly need: glue sticks and sharpened pencils; Kleenex and hand sanitizer; highlighters and erasers; Band-Aids and snacks.
But what the long inventory of required items does not include is the thing every child needs most: his parents to be notified and involved in what is happening in his life.
Sadly, in many public school districts across the country parents can no longer assume that their decisions about the upbringing, education, and care of their own children will be honored. In these instances, politically motivated school boards and administrators have usurped the role of parents. As we continue to see instances nationwide of government officials actively seeking to replace parents as the ultimate determiners of what’s best for children, it’s critical that states step up to enshrine parental rights into law.
What kind of rights are we talking about?
The right and responsibility of every parent to decide how his or her child is raised. The rights of moms and dads to know what their children are being taught in school and to access and review curricula. It’s reasonable to expect parents to be involved in all aspects of their kids’ education, including opting a child out of a particular lesson on say, gender ideology, human sexuality, or another sensitive topic so that parents can discuss those topics at home in a way that is consistent with the family’s beliefs and values. As parents, we also want to be involved in our kids’ extracurricular activities. Whether a child signs up for football or dance, joins the LGBTQ or chess club — every parent has the right to know that information, and along with her child, decide if that activity is the best fit for the child.
Additionally, we’re seeing a troubling trend of school districts excluding parents — going so far as to deliberately <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mom-scores-100000-legal-win-after-school-secretly-transitions-daughter" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hide information</a> — about their kids’ potentially life-altering decisions surrounding their identity, gender, and mental and physical health. It’s in kids’ best interest for parents to be involved any time a child faces serious issues at school, whether academic, social, or mental or emotional health.
The state of <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/mt-governor-signs-bill-safeguarding-parental-rights?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Montana</a> recognized the importance of enshrining parents’ rights into law and recently enacted <a href="https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/HB0676.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">gold-standard legislation</a> that creates guardrails to prevent the government from interfering with parents’ fundamental right to direct the education, health care, and upbringing of their children. In <a href="https://ncleg.gov/Sessions/2023/Bills/Senate/PDF/S49v5.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">North Carolina</a>, the legislature recently overrode the governor’s veto to enact strong, pro-parent policies; <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/iactc/90.1/CH0091.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Iowa</a> and <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/al-governor-signs-bill-safeguarding-parental-rights?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alabama</a> also passed strong parental rights laws. In <a href="https://rules.ok.gov/d2c03259-4590-47b5-89e8-c3e21345ae8f" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Oklahoma</a> and <a href="https://www.doe.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/36603/638059383089400000" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Virginia</a>, the respective departments of education issued proposed rules and policies that strengthen parental rights. And in <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/az-governor-signs-bill-expand-protections-parental-rights?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Arizona</a>, parents now have three of the best statutory protections for their rights: a declaration that parental rights are fundamental, a detailed list of parents’ specific rights to access and approve of learning material, and a legal remedy if those fundamental rights are violated.
Other states should join the movement and affirm the pivotal role of parents in a child’s life. As the <a href="https://adflegal.org/campaign/promise-to-americas-parents?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Promise to America’s Parents</a> underscores, safeguarding parents’ rights through the democratic process ensures transparency so that parents know what is going on in their child’s life. It gives parents meaningful choices as they guide their child’s growth and development. And it empowers parents to hold government officials accountable when they interfere with decisions parents make. By passing parental rights laws, legislatures from coast to coast can give parents confidence and assurance that they’re so valuable, lawmakers are preserving their ability to do their job well in the state books.
Furthermore, when policymakers enact parents’ rights legislation, it trickles down much quicker to the local level by prompting school boards to operate with accountability and transparency and to adopt policies that support parents.
No one loves and cares for a child better than his parents. And no parent wants the government telling them what they can and cannot do. The family unit is the pillar of society and parents are the head of that unit. Respecting the rights of parents to be involved in their kids’ education and make the best decisions on their behalf transcends political party, religion, race, and economic status. Everyone benefits — especially children — when parents are supported.
Matt Sharp serves as senior counsel at <a href="https://adflegal.org/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> and is the director of the ADF Center for Legislative Advocacy.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Top View Shot in Elementary School Computer Science Classroom: Children Sitting at their School Desk Using Personal Computers and Digital Tablets for Assignments.

Why Every State Needs To Protect A Parent’s Right To Be Involved At School

Education

Parents rights

Public Schools

School Boards

The member of the Finnish parliament facing <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/christian-politician-in-finland-grandmother-of-six-on-trial-after-posting-bible-tweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">prosecution over her religious beliefs</a> was back in court this week, facing a trial for expressing her <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/christianity" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Christian</a> views on marriage and sexuality.
Parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen <a href="https://adfinternational.org/trial-about-censorship-of-finnish-politicians-bible-tweet/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">appeared</a> before the Helsinki Court of Appeal on Thursday and Friday to defend her beliefs after she was charged with “hate speech” violations, including for a 2019 tweet that included pictures of Bible verses and a pamphlet she wrote on marriage back in 2004.
“Everyone should be able to share their beliefs without fearing censorship by state-authorities. I know that the prosecution is trying to make an example of me to scare others into silence. Yet, you do not have to align with my views to agree that everyone should be able to speak freely. With God’s help I will remain steadfast and continue defending everyone’s human right to free speech,” Räsänen said on the first day of her new trial, according to the Alliance Defending Freedom International, which is supporting the parliamentarian’s defense. 
She was unanimously acquitted by the District Court of Helsinki for the same charges back in March 2022.
Bishop Juhana Pohjola is also being prosecuted for publishing the pamphlet under charges related to “war crimes and crimes against humanity” in the criminal code of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/finland" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Finland</a>. 
Prosecutors have argued that they “can limit freedom of expression in the outward expression of religion.” They also said that the 2019 tweet was criminal because of Räsänen&#8217;s interpretation of the verse. “You can cite the Bible, but it is Räsänen’s interpretation and opinion about the Bible verses that are criminal,” the prosecutor said. 
Paul Coleman, the executive director of ADF International and a member of Räsänen’s legal team, said that Finland’s hate speech laws were a danger to democratic societies. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1690455510071000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0zc8zwWGoXeRzcNJLiJVWI">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“In a democratic society, everyone should be free to share their beliefs without fear of state prosecution. Criminalizing speech through so-called ‘hate-speech’ laws shuts down important public debates and endangers democracy. Cases like Päivi’s create a culture of fear and censorship and are becoming increasingly common worldwide. We hope the Helsinki Court of Appeal will uphold the fundamental right to freedom of speech and clear Päivi Räsänen of these baseless charges,” he said. 
The case has garnered international attention <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/republican-lawmakers-slam-prosecution-of-finnish-politician-over-religious-beliefs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">with Republicans urging</a> State Department Officials to step in and support Räsänen. Earlier this month, Republican representatives sent a letter to Douglas Hickey, America’s ambassador to Finland, and Rashad Hussain, the ambassador for the U.S. Office of Religious Freedom, in her defense.

Screen Shot 2023-09-01 at 8.04.37 AM

Finnish Politician Back In Court For ‘Criminal’ Interpretation Of Bible Verses

Finnish Politician Back In Court For 'Criminal' Interpretation Of Bible Verses

Bible

Homosexuality

A chair for a ticket booth operator who is six-months pregnant. A bottle of water for an expectant shift worker. An extra restroom break for a pregnant cashier on her feet all day.
Congress recently passed a new law, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, to ensure that every pregnant woman receives fair, reasonable job accommodations to keep her and her unborn child healthy and safe while she remains in the workforce. It was a transformational, bipartisan, pro-woman law to ensure employers reasonably accommodate pregnancies, childbirth, and related conditions.
What the law did not include was a right to an abortion.
Yet the Biden administration has illegally hijacked this law as its latest vehicle to try and impose an abortion mandate on the American people. Recently, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission proposed <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/public-inspection/2023-17041/regulations-to-implement-the-pregnant-workers-fairness-act" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new regulations</a> for implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act to require virtually every employer in the country, even pro-life and religious Americans who recognize that life begins at conception, to facilitate abortion.
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act requires every employer in America to “reasonably accommodate” a worker’s “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” The administration is now proposing that “related medical conditions” include “termination of pregnancy, including via &#8230; abortion.” This new mandate would require employers with more than 15 employees to create “reasonable accommodations” for their workers’ elective abortions, even if doing so violates their pro-life or religious beliefs.
But Congress sought to protect pregnant workers, not force employers to facilitate abortions.
Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the value of unborn lives in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Alliance Defending Freedom has tracked the administration’s effort to find every possible avenue to advance a pro-abortion agenda, even if doing so is illegal and grossly exceeds the authority of the executive branch. From trying to require <a href="https://adflegal.org/article/mayo-pharmacy-challenging-mandate-dispense-abortion-drugs?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pharmacies</a> that accept Medicaid patients to dispense abortion-inducing drugs, to forcing <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/court-halts-biden-admins-attempt-turn-ers-abortion-facilities?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">emergency room doctors</a> to perform and complete abortions, to creating a 50-state online <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/alliance-hippocratic-medicine-v-us-food-and-drug-administration?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">mail-order chemical abortion drug economy</a>.
This emboldened pro-abortion activists to call on the administration, through the EEOC, to read into the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act an abortion mandate on employers across the country, requiring them to “accommodate” an employee’s elective abortion, regardless of state laws protecting unborn life or employers’ pro-life positions or religious beliefs.
The EEOC’s new mandate requires employers, for example, to give women extra time off from work to make it possible for them to obtain abortions, even if state law prohibits intentionally assisting women in obtaining abortions — and even if the state is the woman’s employer.
Pro-life and religious employers have the right to live and speak the truth about the sanctity of life — the importance of caring for unborn children and their mothers. But the Biden administration has refused to craft any exemptions in the text of its new abortion regulations.
Whether to impose an abortion mandate on virtually every employer in America is a major question that only Congress can tackle through the democratic process. The Supreme Court thus would require the administration to show clear language in the text of the act giving them authority to impose this mandate. None exists. Congress did not put abortion anywhere in the text of the law, so there is no legal authority for any new federal regulations regarding abortion. Indeed, Senator Bob Casey (D-PA), the chief sponsor of the bill, <a href="https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-168/issue-200/senate-section/article/S10081-2" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promised</a> that the law did not authorize any “regulation that requires abortion leave.”
The proposed rule was published on August 11, kicking off a 60-day period for Americans to <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/public-inspection/2023-17041/regulations-to-implement-the-pregnant-workers-fairness-act" target="_blank" rel="noopener">let their voices be heard</a>. What they should tell the administration is that it doesn’t have the legal authority to smuggle an abortion mandate into a pro-woman, pro-life law. It’s unlawful for the executive branch to continue weaponizing the administrative process to advance a radical pro-abortion agenda.
Julie Marie Blake serves as senior counsel for regulatory litigation at <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Complete all the jobs before the baby comes to the world.

Biden Administration Hijacks Pregnant-Workers Law To Further Abortion

Biden Admin

Pregnancy

A federal district court sided with a Michigan farmer on Monday, ruling that he is free to participate in a city-run farmer&#8217;s market after he was booted over his Catholic views on marriage.
Steve Tennes, who owns Country Mill Farms, was banned in 2017 from the East Lansing farmer’s market by city officials after he posted on Facebook that he follows the Catholic Church&#8217;s teachings on marriage, which includes opposing same-sex weddings at his family&#8217;s orchard.
East Lansing officials reacted by using a &#8220;discretionary system of individual assessments&#8221; to ban Tennes and his farm from participating in the seasonal market, despite Tennes never receiving any complaints from customers, his legal team said.
Tennes and his farm sued the city of East Lansing in 2017.
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/mi-farmer-free-continue-selling-apples-east-lansing-farmers-market?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a> that the city&#8217;s ban on Tennes &#8220;constituted a burden on plaintiffs&#8217; religious beliefs.&#8221;
Tennes and his farm “were forced to choose between following their religious beliefs and a government benefit for which they were otherwise qualified,” violating his right to exercise his religion freely, Maloney <a href="https://adflegal.org/sites/default/files/2023-08/Country-Mill-Farms-v-East-Lansing-2023-08-21-Ruling.pdf?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a>.
&#8220;The reason is simple: denying a person an equal share of the rights, benefits, and privileges enjoyed by other citizens because of her faith discourages religious activity,&#8221; the court said, quoting the 6th Circuit appeals court.
Tennes&#8217; farm is also 22 miles away from East Lansing, which his legal team noted is outside of the city&#8217;s jurisdiction.
In 2017 when Tennes first sued the city, the same judge issued a preliminary injunction, ordering the city to allow him to participate in the farmer&#8217;s market while his litigation proceeded.
He has not had any issues with his farm&#8217;s participation in the farmer&#8217;s market since then, his legal team said.
&#8220;He serves and welcomes everyone to his stand. No one is ever turned away,&#8221; attorney John Bursch <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/fruit-grower-who-opposes-same-sex-marriage-wins-ruling-over-access-to-public-market-3/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> Tuesday.
Tennes was represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative legal group.
“Tennes and Country Mill Farms are grateful for the court’s decision protecting religious liberty,” <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/mi-farmer-free-continue-selling-apples-east-lansing-farmers-market?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> ADF Senior Counsel Kate Anderson, who argued before the court for Tennes.
“At the same time, they are eager to mend fences with current city officials and get back to doing what Country Mill does best—as expressed in its mission statement: ‘glorifying God by facilitating family fun on the farm and feeding families,’” Anderson said.
Several high-profile cases dealing with business owners who opposed same-sex marriage on religious grounds have wound up at the Supreme Court in recent years.
In June, the Supreme Court struck down a Colorado law that would have punished a Christian graphic designer who declined to design a website for a same-sex wedding that violated her religious beliefs.
That case echoed another Supreme Court case that also came from Colorado.
In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled narrowly in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. In that case, the court reversed the Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s decision against Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, saying the state had failed to be neutral on religion.

Denver, Colorado, farmers market

Federal Court Sides With Catholic Farmer Booted From Farmer’s Market Over Traditional Marriage Views

Federal Court Sides With Catholic Farmer Booted From Farmer's Market Over Traditional Marriage Views

Freedom of Speech

Michigan

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Wednesday that chemical abortion drug mifepristone should not be distributed through the mail or prescribed via telemedicine in a ruling that cannot take effect until the Supreme Court issues a ruling on the decision. 
The appeals court did not go as far as U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-judge-in-texas-suspends-fda-approval-of-abortion-pill-used-in-up-to-half-of-abortions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">who moved to suspend</a> the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/fda" target="_blank" rel="noopener">FDA</a>’s approval of mifepristone earlier this year, but it did <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/appeals-court-upholds-restrictions-abortion-pill-access-rcna100255" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reinstate</a> regulations on mailing and prescribing the pill. Mifepristone is used in up to half of all abortions. 
“The 5th Circuit rightly required the FDA to do its job and restore crucial safeguards for women and girls, including ending illegal mail-order abortions,” <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/fda-must-restore-vital-safeguards-chemical-abortion-drugs-5th-circuit-rules?utm_source=google&amp;utm_medium=ppc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erin Hawley, who helped represent those who sued FDA officials to stop the distribution of the drug  “The FDA will finally be made to account for the damage it has caused to the health of countless women and girls and the rule of law by unlawfully removing every meaningful safeguard from the chemical abortion drug regimen.”
“The FDA’s unprecedented and unlawful actions did not reflect scientific judgment but rather revealed politically driven decisions to push a dangerous drug regimen without regard to women’s health or the rule of law. This is a significant victory for the doctors and medical associations we represent and, more importantly, the health and safety of women,” Hawley added. 
The decision was <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/08/16/1194280392/ruling-deals-blow-to-access-to-abortion-pill-mifepristone-but-nothing-changes-ye#:~:text=In%20a%2093%2Dpage%20ruling,the%20case%2C%20cheered%20the%20opinion." target="_blank" rel="noopener">made</a> by three judges, two of whom were appointed by former President Donald Trump and one by former President George Bush. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the case in its coming fall session after previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-releases-decision-on-abortion-pill-mifepristone" target="_blank" rel="noopener">putting a stay</a> on Kacsmaryk&#8217;s decision to suspend approval for the pill. 
The decision was widely celebrated by pro-life organizations and decried by pro-abortion groups.
“Today’s ruling by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstating these basic safeguards and stopping the dangerous practice of mail-order abortions is a first step towards reprioritizing women’s health over the interests of the abortion industry and its allies within our profession. As physicians, we will continue to fight for all our patients to be able to receive the best fully informed and evidence-based healthcare possible,” said a <a href="https://aaplog.org/aaplogs-statement-on-the-fifth-circuit-court-of-appeals-decision-to-reinstate-original-rems-safeguards-on-mifepristone/">statement</a> from the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, a plaintiff in the case. 
Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Alexis McGill Johnson, claimed that the ruling “makes it clear that mifepristone’s approval is very much still at risk, as is the FDA’s independence.&#8221;

Anti-Abortion Activists Protest Outside Health And Human Services

Federal Appeals Court Makes Decision On The Mailing Of Abortion Pills

Court

Planned Parenthood

Menu

Streaming Now