JUSTICE DEPARTMENT: ACLU LIED ABOUT ABORTION FOR ILLEGAL-ALIEN TEEN
Appeals to Supreme Court to prevent precedent for taxpayer funding
Published: 8 hours ago
Bob Unruh
The Department of Justice is charging that the pro-abortion American Civil Liberties Union had an abortionist show up at 4:15 a.m. to do a taxpayer-funded abortion on a teen illegal alien after telling the court that the procedure would not happen until the following day.
The abortion was rushed, according to a new DOJ filing with the U.S. Supreme Court, because government attorneys were preparing to ask the high court to review the case after Democrat-appointed appellate judges effectively created a right to abortion for illegal aliens.
While the abortion on the illegal-alien teen is over, the precedent must be overturned, they argue.
The teen, while housed in a taxpayer-funded shelter in Texas, demanded that taxpayers pay for an abortion. The ACLU eventually obtained an abortion order from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals endorsed only by judges picked by Democrats.
The Washington Times reported Justice Department lawyers said they had been preparing to ask the Supreme Court to take up the case, “but the ACLU’s speedy abortion for the girl identified in court documents only as ‘J.D.’ short-circuited that.”
The brief reads: “The government planned to seek an emergency stay from this court before Ms. Doe could obtain an abortion. Ms. Doe’s appointment was changed so that instead of obtain counseling at 7:30 a.m. on October 25, she would undergo an abortion at 4:15 a.m. that morning, just hours before the government planned to file its stay application.”
The Washington Examiner, under a headline citing a “web of deceit” by the ACLU, noted the ACLU “misled” the government.
The government’s brief said: “After informing Justice Department attorneys that the procedure would occur on October 26th, Jane Doe’s attorneys scheduled the abortion for the early morning hours of October 25th, thereby thwarting Supreme Court review.
“In light of that, the Justice Department believes the judgment under review should be vacated, and discipline may be warranted against Jane Doe’s attorneys.”
In a column for the Examiner, Margot Cleveland noted the government suggests the teen’s lawyers should be forced to prove “why disciplinary action should not be taken against respondent’s counsel – either directly by this court or through referral to the state bars to which counsel belong – for what appear to be material misrepresentations and omissions to government counsel designed to thwart this court’s review.”
The government filing said the government had asked to be kept informed of the timing of the abortion procedure, and “one of the respondent’s counsel agreed.”
It was on Oct. 25 that the DOJ was planning to file an appeal with the Supreme Court.
Cleveland wrote that the additional facts “should placate those in the pro-life community who, upon learning that Jane Doe had aborted her baby, wrongfully inferred that the Department of Justice had opted not to appeal the circuit court decision to the Supreme Court.”
She continued: “While the Supreme Court cannot bring Jane Doe’s baby back to life, it can, and should, vacate the D.C. Circuit’s decision and make clear that aliens detained at our country’s border do not hold a constitutional ‘right’ to abortion. The Supreme Court should also severely sanction the ACLU for its deceit.”
WND reported when the ACLU succeeded in having the unborn child aborted.
BREAKING: Jane Doe had her #abortion this morning. #JusticeForJane
— ACLU of DC (@ACLU_DC) October 25, 2017
The abortion had been authorized six Democrat-appointed judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, who were blasted by a variety of organizations for creating a new “right” to abortion at taxpayer expense even for those who have broken U.S. laws to enter the country.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, said, “We are deeply saddened to learn that Jane Doe’s child has been aborted.
“Our thoughts are foremost with the young girl, who has now been saddled with the death of her child before she has even reached her 18th birthday – a terrible burden for anyone to carry, much less at such a tender age and so far from home. We ask that the pro-life community and all compassionate Americans keep her and her child in their prayers.”
She continued: “We unequivocally reject abortion advocates’ narrative that justice has been done in this case. Instead the extreme agenda of the abortion lobby and the ACLU has claimed two victims and made a cruel mockery of the ‘American dream.’ We will continue to oppose all efforts to impose a so-called constitutional right to abortion and turn the United States into a sanctuary nation for abortion.”
The organization previously praised the government, which, through its Department of Health and Human Services, argued that abortion is not “health care.”
Politico reported three Republican appointees on the court opposed the abortion demand.
Students for Life of American President Kristan Hawkins said the judges put “the partisan interests of abortion over a teenager’s true needs for help. Expanding a so-called ‘right’ of a taxpayer-facilitated abortion to apply to any woman who happens to be on U.S. soil goes against the pro-life views of a majority of Americans, and certainly against the views of most Americans who don’t want their tax dollars paying to end life.”
She said the United States “should not become an abortion destination spot for the world.”
“Shame on Planned Parenthood and the ACLU for using this teenager to try and create Roe v. Wade 2.0 in the courts.”
Penny Nance, CEO and president of Concerned Women for America, said: “Allowing our taxpayers to be entangled in financing and facilitating an abortion for an undocumented teen sets a horrible precedent. We do not want our nation to be known as a place where illegal immigrants can come in order to procure free abortions.
“And let’s remember that abortion is not health care. If we want to talk about providing care for undocumented minors who cross our border, then let’s be honest about the fact that there were two lives that crossed our border. There is a fully formed, unborn baby whose life is on the line here. An ultrasound would show that he or she has easily recognizable fingers, toes, and eyes,” Nance said.
http://www.wnd.com/2017/11/justice-d...al-alien-teen/
Justice Department asks Supreme Court to hear illegal immigrant abortion case
by Kelly Cohen | Nov 3, 2017, 10:04 AM
The Department of Justice on Friday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case involving the 17-year-old undocumented immigrant detainee who received an abortion last month after a weeks-long legal battle with the Trump administration, and to discipline the attorneys who represented her.
The Justice Department filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court this week, saying “Jane Doe’s” American Civil Liberties Union attorneys “misled” on the timing of the abortion.
“After informing Justice Department attorneys that the procedure would occur on October 26th, Jane Doe’s attorneys scheduled the abortion for the early morning hours of October 25th, thereby thwarting Supreme Court review,” Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley said Friday.
O’Malley also said “discipline may be warranted” against Jane Doe’s attorneys.
The Justice Department argues the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Oct. 24 to allow the abortion to go forward “should be vacated.”
“The government asked to be kept informed of the timing of Ms. Doe’s abortion procedure, and one of respondent’s counsel agreed to do so,” the Justice Department lawyers argue. “Although Ms. Doe’s representatives informed the government of the change in timing, they did not inform the government of the other two developments — which kept the government in the dark about when Ms. Doe was scheduled to have an abortion.”
Because of that, the ruling allowing her to have an abortion should be vacated, “and the case should be remanded to the court of appeals with instructions to remand to the district court for dismissal of all claims for prospective relief regarding pregnant unaccompanied minors.”
This means the Justice Department believes a situation like this could come up again, and the agency wants to set a precedent for all lower courts to follow.
Trump administration and state-level officials — she was being held in a detention center in Texas — argued that because she was an illegal immigrant, she had no constitutional right to an elective abortion in the United States.
"People I don't even know are trying to make me change my mind," Doe said in a statement from the ACLU upon having her abortion. "I made my decision and that is between me and God. Through all of this, I have never changed my mind."
In a statement, the ACLU called the allegations "baseless."
“That government lawyers failed to seek judicial review quickly enough is their fault, not ours,” the group's legal director, David Cole, said in a statement. “We won’t let this distract us from the real issue here, which is that there are many more young women like Jane Doe out there who are still unable to get the care they need because of the Trump administration’s unconstitutional policies. We will not stop fighting until we have justice for every young woman like Jane.”
Last week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions told Fox News he was “disturbed” that Jane Doe was able to get an abortion before the Justice Department could file a brief or appeal to block the procedure.
"We'll look at that and pursue it in any way possible," Sessions said when asked if the Justice Department was ready to drop the issue. "I don't believe that we should be using taxpayers' dollars to fund abortions and I think, in this case, it certainly was not justified. We've resisted it steadfastly and I am very disappointed that these lawyers were able to take the client around the law to avoid a court hearing at least to see that we were filing."
However, Jane Doe made it clear that taxpayer dollars were not used for her abortion, but rather she paid for it through donations from an undisclosed nonprofit organization.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ju...rticle/2639534
