Corporate media are obsessed with covering their pages with articles boosting the success of deceptive abortion ballot measures in states like Nevada. Yet, the press’ attempt to convince Americans that abortion activists are the only ones gaining ground in the fight over unborn babies falls apart in the face of two pro-life decisions from two separate state supreme courts this week.
In Wisconsin, the state supreme court justices unanimously ruled to vacate a civil harassment injunction brought against pro-life activist Brian Aish by abortion facility staffer Nancy Kindschy because it violated the protestor’s First Amendment right to share his Christian and pro-life beliefs.
Aish had a long history of “holding up signs quoting Bible verses” and “preaching” about repentance to anyone entering or exiting abortion facilities. A circuit court and appeals court agreed that this constituted harassment and issued a four-year injunction “which prohibited Aish from speaking to Kindschy, or going to her residence ‘or any other premises
temporarily occupied by [Kindschy].’”
The state supreme court, however, decided “the injunction is a content-based restriction on Aish’s speech and that it fails to satisfy strict scrutiny.”
“Here, the injunction orders Aish to avoid any location Kindschy might be, effectively prohibiting Aish from speaking not just to Kindschy, but to others at the clinic or anywhere else that she might be. In doing so, the injunction burdens significantly more speech than is necessary to protect individual privacy, freedom of movement to and from work, and freedom from fear of death. Therefore, it cannot survive strict scrutiny,” the justices wrote.
In her concurring opinion, Justice Rebecca Bradley added that the “unconstitutional injunction impermissibly infringed Aish’s fundamental First Amendment right to speak freely on ‘a profound moral issue on which Americans hold sharply conflicting views.”
The Thomas More Society, which represented Aish, celebrated the ruling as a victory for the pro-life movement.
“It reaffirms that the First Amendment embodies a paramount American value of protecting free speech, even if the viewpoint expressed may be unpopular or controversial — a value that transcends partisan divides,” Joan Mannix, Thomas More Society executive vice president and managing counsel, said in a statement.
One day after Aish’s victory in Wisconsin, the Iowa Supreme Court lifted an injunction on the state’s Fetal Heartbeat Act.
Gov. Kim Reynolds, R-Iowa, first signed the pro-life legislation into law in 2023 after it passed during a special session. It was quickly blocked by a judge just a few days later.
In a four to three decision, justices determined on Friday that barring abortions beyond the detection of an in-womb heartbeat around six weeks gestation is “rationally related to the
state’s legitimate interest in protecting unborn life.” The court sent the case back to lower courts but reaffirmed that “abortion is not a fundamental right under the Iowa Constitution.”
The New York Times dubbed the decision “a painful reminder of how much political ground [Democrats] have lost in Iowa and, they hoped, an election-year warning to voters across the country that Republicans would continue trying to limit abortion in places where they win power.”
Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which estimates the Iowa law saves 2,093 lives each year, however, celebrated the decision as a popular victory that benefits mothers and babies alike.
“Iowa took a giant step forward today in the human rights struggle to protect babies in the womb,” Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement.
Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.
Comments are closed.