Connect with us

Wire

Letts: Police Could Soon Have a Powerful New Role if Roe v. Wade Is Overturned

Western Journal

Published

on

The phrase “turnabout is fair play” comes to mind regarding the Supreme Court’s leaked decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

In the late ’80s and early ’90s, pro-life demonstrators peacefully blocked the entrances to abortion clinics, resulting in their arrests. But now, with the Roe decision on the verge of being overturned, the question has to be asked: What will police officers do now with those who either perform abortions or seek abortions in states where abortion will be banned?

Yes, about half the states will likely continue to allow abortion. But in states that ban abortion, those on the hard left might try to test the system to see if police will make arrests or back down.

Think it can’t happen? Think back no further than the Defund the Police movement when Americans watched as rioters threw bricks through windows. In some cases, they tore up downtowns with impunity because police were ordered by their superiors to stand down.

Can that happen again in front of abortion clinics? If confronted with mobs of thousands of pro-abortion demonstrators, what would the police do?

In the post-Roe era, police officers, regardless of whether they are personally pro-life or pro-abortion, must do their jobs and arrest both the abortion butchers and those who aid and abet them inside outlawed abortuaries.

We are a nation governed by the rule of law. If we allow pro-abortion demonstrators to thwart the Roe reversal, should it occur, we will become a nation of mob rule, no different than the lynch mobs in the days of the Wild West. That must not be tolerated.

So whether it’s a single abortionist performing an illegal abortion or an abortionist flanked by a mob of abortion supporters, arrests need to be made.

Will it be easy? No, it won’t. But it is right, and it is necessary.

The job of the police is to keep the peace and enforce the law. When police had to arrest about 85,000 pro-life demonstrators, many pro-life officers had to hold their noses while protecting the horrid abortionists. Frequently, officers would quietly express to demonstrators how they admired their act of bravery but apologetically continue with the arrest.

Will the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade?

Now, officers will likely face the reversal of that scenario as pro-abortion activists continue to protest the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe.

In a post-Roe landscape, demonstrators who yell out “my body, my choice” may be arrested by a police officer who may respond with “my state, my duty.” If someone is so hell-bent on getting an abortion, she will need to travel to a state that won’t make arrests for the “choice” of murdering one’s own child.

Legislation has even been considered that would allow post-birth abortions weeks after a child is born. Why should that be a shock? When Roe v. Wade codified that human life has no value at any time in the womb, the natural extrapolation was that life outside the womb has no value either.

Overturning Roe should be helpful in reversing this murderous course and returning to protecting life in and out of the womb. Perhaps we will even see a constitutional amendment passed that enshrines the right to life.

Apart from basic morality, there is a practical question. Why on earth would anyone risk arrest by either obtaining an abortion or performing an abortion in a state that forbids it? Why wouldn’t they simply travel to a state that allows it? Simple: Hell is never satisfied. It demands more blood — in all 50 states and worldwide.

Oh, the demonstrators in the name of “reproductive rights” and other sugar-coated catchphrases will shriek, “My body, my choice.” In reality, it’s not a choice; it’s a precious and vulnerable child who needs protection, deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, just like us adults.

Lest we forget, at one time all of us were that vulnerable child.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Wire

Clarence Thomas Speaks Out on Supreme Court Leak: ‘It Changes the Institution Forever’

Western Journal

Published

on

Robert Mueller

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said Friday that the leak of a draft opinion that could lead to overturning the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion has severely damaged the court.

“I do think that what happened at the court is tremendously bad… I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them,” Thomas said at the Old Parkland Conference, according to Fox News.

He repeated the concern and elaborated further in remarks quoted by The Washington Post.

“I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them. And then I wonder — when they’re gone or destabilized — what we’re going to have as a country,” he said, according to The Post.

Thomas has spoken out previously about the pressures faced by the court to rule in ways liberals want.

Last week, Thomas said Americans are “becoming addicted to wanting particular outcomes, not living with the outcomes we don’t like,” according to the Daily Mail.

“It bodes ill for a free society,” he said, according to The Washington Post.

“We can’t be an institution that can be bullied into giving you just the outcomes you want. The events from earlier this week are a symptom of that,” he said then.

Will the court pull back from the opinions expressed in the leaked draft?

Thomas said Friday that, until the leak took place, it was unimaginable that such a thing would happen.

“The institution that I’m a part of — if someone said that one line of one opinion would be leaked by anyone, you would say, ‘Oh, that’s impossible. No one would ever do that,’” Thomas said, “There’s such a belief in the rule of law, belief in the court, belief in what we’re doing, that that was verboten.”

 “And look where we are, where now that trust or that belief is gone forever. And when you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally. You begin to look over your shoulder. It’s like kind of an infidelity, that you can explain it, but you can’t undo it,” he said at the conference sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, the Manhattan Institute and the Hoover Institution.

“Anybody who would, for example, have an attitude to leak documents, that general attitude is your future on the bench,” Thomas said. “And you need to be concerned about that. And we never had that before. We actually trusted — we might have been a dysfunctional family, but we were a family.”

Thomas said the principle of stare decisis — which means that precedents are generally accepted — is a guideline, not a commandment.

“When someone uses stare decisis, that means they’re out of arguments,” he said. “They’re just waving the white flag.”

He later spoke about those who lack of courage, without being more specific.

 “Like they know what is right, and they’re scared to death of doing it. And then they come up with all these excuses for not doing it.”

During his remarks, he said that as a black conservative, he has had issues with one particular group.

“People assume that I’ve had difficulties when I’ve been around members of my race,” Thomas said. “It’s just the opposite. The only people with whom I’ve had difficulties are white, liberal elites who consider themselves the anointed and us the benighted. . . . I have never had issues with members of my race.”

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said Friday that the leak of a draft opinion that could lead to overturning the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion has severely damaged the court. “I do think that what happened at the court is tremendously bad… I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them,” Thomas said at the Old Parkland Conference, according to Fox News. He repeated the concern and elaborated further in remarks quoted by The Washington Post. “I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them. And then I wonder — when they’re gone or destabilized — what we’re going to have as a country,” he said, according to The Post. Thomas has spoken out previously about the pressures faced by the court to rule in ways liberals want. Last week, Thomas said Americans are “becoming addicted to wanting particular outcomes, not living with the outcomes we don’t like,” according to the Daily Mail. “It bodes ill for a free society,” he said, according to The Washington Post. “We can’t be an institution that can be bullied into giving you just the outcomes you want. The events from earlier this week are a symptom of that,” he said then.

Will the court pull back from the opinions expressed in the leaked draft?
Thomas said Friday that, until the leak took place, it was unimaginable that such a thing would happen. “The institution that I’m a part of — if someone said that one line of one opinion would be leaked by anyone, you would say, ‘Oh, that’s impossible. No one would ever do that,’” Thomas said, “There’s such a belief in the rule of law, belief in the court, belief in what we’re doing, that that was verboten.”  “And look where we are, where now that trust…

Continue Reading

Wire

Parents’ Group Speaks Out After Reportedly Being Targeted by FBI, Merrick Garland as Terrorist ‘Threats’

Western Journal

Published

on

The head of a parents’ organization — consisting mostly of concerned mothers — that was reportedly targeted by Attorney General Merrick Garland’s FBI said Garland himself is “the terrorist.”

Moms for Liberty co-founder Tiffany Justice told the Daily Caller she was concerned investigations into the group’s members might “intimate our moms” in a piece published Friday.

The remarks came two days after House Republicans said they’d found smoking-gun evidence the FBI was investigating parents’ groups that had engaged in protests at school board meetings, despite Garland’s protestations to the contrary.

(Here at The Western Journal, we’ve proudly supported parents standing up to woke ideology like critical race theory — and we’ve decried the interference at the federal level by President Joe Biden’s administration. We’ll continue fighting for parental rights. You can help us by subscribing.)

The letter to the Department of Justice, authored by Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan and signed by other Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee, noted the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division had created a threat tag for investigations into parents’ groups — EDUOFFICIALS.

“We have learned from brave whistleblowers that the FBI has opened investigations with the EDUOFFICIALS threat tag in almost every region of the country and relating to all types of educational settings,” the letter noted.

“The information we have received shows how, as a direct result of your directive, federal law enforcement is using counterterrorism resources to investigate protected First Amendment activity.”

Garland had come under fire after an Oct. 4, 2021 memo directed the FBI to look into “threats” against school personnel.

Should critical race theory be removed from the classroom?

The memo came after a wave of parental protests and contentious school board meetings — particularly in Loudoun and Fairfax counties in Virginia — over critical race theory in the classroom.

“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools,” the memo read.

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate.”

During testimony later that month, Garland insisted the directive only involved “concerns about violence, threats of violence, other criminal conduct.”

That doesn’t seem to be the case. The House Judiciary Committee’s letter notes the FBI interviewed a Moms for Liberty member after an investigation that began when a tip submitted to the bureau through the National Threat Operations Center hotline, claimed she told a local school board “we are coming for you.”

The snitch said the mother was a threat because she was part of a “right wing mom’s group” and “is a gun owner.”

Jordan then noted that when the FBI interviewed the mom, they discovered she only meant Moms for Liberty sought “to replace the school board with new members through the electoral process” because of their stance on mask mandates.

Justice told the Daily Caller that she was “sad to see” the FBI investigations “happening to people that care most about this country.”

The mothers who show up at school board meetings, she said, were “genuinely concerned about their children’s education” — but Garland’s DOJ sees them as “the enemy.”

“This should not be happening and we are going to do everything we can to ensure that it stops,” she told the Daily Caller.

In a statement, Justice and her fellow Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich said this was “proof of what many of us suspected and some of us knew: that the Department of Justice was using counter-terrorism authority under the PATRIOT Act to investigate parents of schoolchildren.”

“We at Moms for Liberty knew first hand of the first example Jim Jordan cited, because she was – as the whistleblower letter says – one of our members,” the statement read.

“The mother was terrified. She had been contacted by the FBI. She had been told by the FBI not to say anything about that call. She had also been told that there were many other mothers being investigated.”

The letter was more confirmation of what Garland has strenuously denied: that FBI resources are being used to treat parents as potential domestic terror suspects without any specific threat.

The House Judiciary GOP had already blown the whistle on the EDUOFFICIAL tag last November. We now have a rough idea of how promiscuously it’s being applied and how little threat there actually is.

While no sinister, violent, far-right threat against school boards has, as of yet, been uncovered, we now have credible reports of the FBI harassing a member of a conservative mothers’ group based off of a cardboard-flimsy rationale.

When Garland’s memo was released, it seemed clear the FBI was being weaponized against a widespread parents’ revolt in which wholly rational anger was being unleashed — in a constitutionally protected manner — against school boards that were adopting woke ideology or prolonging mask mandates beyond reasonable limits. This anger led to, among other things, a Republican sweep of statewide offices in off-year elections in increasingly blue Virginia, including for governor.

Perhaps when Garland was talking about investigating “threats,” he wasn’t talking about any hazard to the well-being of school-board members or educational employees. Instead, it was about the Democrats’ 2022 electoral chances.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The head of a parents’ organization — consisting mostly of concerned mothers — that was reportedly targeted by Attorney General Merrick Garland’s FBI said Garland himself is “the terrorist.” Moms for Liberty co-founder Tiffany Justice told the Daily Caller she was concerned investigations into the group’s members might “intimate our moms” in a piece published Friday. The remarks came two days after House Republicans said they’d found smoking-gun evidence the FBI was investigating parents’ groups that had engaged in protests at school board meetings, despite Garland’s protestations to the contrary. (Here at The Western Journal, we’ve proudly supported parents standing up to woke ideology like critical race theory — and we’ve decried the interference at the federal level by President Joe Biden’s administration. We’ll continue fighting for parental rights. You can help us by subscribing.) The letter to the Department of Justice, authored by Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan and signed by other Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee, noted the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division had created a threat tag for investigations into parents’ groups — EDUOFFICIALS. “We have learned from brave whistleblowers that the FBI has opened investigations with the EDUOFFICIALS threat tag in almost every region of the country and relating to all types of educational settings,” the letter noted. “The information we have received shows how, as a direct result of your directive, federal law enforcement is using counterterrorism resources to investigate protected First Amendment activity.” BREAKING: The Biden Administration has mobilized FBI counterterrorism resources to investigate parents, including at least one member of @Moms4Liberty, for expressing protected political speech at local school board meetings. This is a grave abuse of power. pic.twitter.com/MdK0vm51VN — Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) May 12, 2022 Garland had come under fire after an Oct. 4, 2021 memo directed the FBI to look…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week