The John-Henry Westen Show - SPECIAL： Thomas More Society, John-Henry Westen On Winning For Life

00:00:00.000 We can't save people from just abortion 0.99

00:00:03.800 and then still they're lost eternally. 0.97

00:00:09.440 That's ridiculous. 0.83

00:00:11.280 We're saving their lives for eternal life. 0.88

00:00:15.160 So if you want a good clue as to how to find a media organization

00:00:18.580 that you can trust, trust Jesus Christ.

00:00:30.000 Hey my friends, as many of you know, a couple of weeks ago now

00:00:33.320 we were at March for Life and at March for Life every year

00:00:36.140 there is something called the Law of Life Summit.

00:00:38.060 You know, very often you don't get good news in the pro-life movement.

00:00:41.940 There is actually a lot of good news coming out of the legal challenges

00:00:45.220 and no team is better at doing legal challenges on pro-life issues

00:00:49.780 than is Thomas More Society.

00:00:52.100 They are absolutely fabulous.

00:00:55.820 Peter Breen, Tom Brescia, their group has been

00:00:59.680 absolutely stellar in supporting every pro-life group out there

00:01:03.280 that's worthy of the name and the victories are stellar.

00:01:06.120 So we wanted to show you this roundup from the lawyers

00:01:10.680 at Law of Life Summit.

00:01:13.320 Also, as a snippet, I was asked to give a reason

00:01:15.960 why people should trust LifeSite News

00:01:19.260 and how they can know what media to trust.

00:01:22.880 And that's there for you as well on this special episode

00:01:25.600 of the John Henry Weston Show.

00:01:27.240 May God bless you.

00:01:29.680 Welcome to LifeSite League.

00:01:31.860 What are we?

00:01:33.500 We are change.

00:01:39.560 We are relentless.

00:01:45.280 We are a voice for the voiceless.

00:01:51.400 We are prayer warriors.

00:01:53.140 We are journalists.

00:02:03.500 We are activists.

00:02:07.840 As citizen journalists, we, members of LifeSite League,

00:02:12.340 contribute stories to LifeSite News from across the world.

00:02:16.080 Christ is calling you.

00:02:19.100 He is calling every single one of us to fight,

00:02:23.400 to fight for truth and stand on the front lines

00:02:26.360 with our greatest weapon in our hand, the rosary.

00:02:29.220 The world we are living in is encompassed by evil.

00:02:33.540 It is mocking God, killing babies in the womb, and burning down our churches. 0.95

00:02:39.480 And what are so many of us doing? 0.97

00:02:42.020 We are standing by in silence.

00:02:44.900 Or worse, we are compromising and joining the devil's army out of convenience.

00:02:49.920 But not anymore.

00:02:52.760 LifeSite News brings to you the League.

00:02:55.520 We stand on the side of Christ.

00:02:57.920 We stand for truth and are ready to transform the culture we are living in.

00:03:02.960 There is no time to waste.

00:03:05.240 There is no time for weakness.

00:03:07.840 Join the fight for truth now.

00:03:09.660 Join LifeSite League.

00:03:10.820 And let's begin, as we always do, with the sign of the cross.

00:03:23.760 In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

00:03:27.540 Amen.

00:03:30.540 So it is my honor to welcome and introduce

00:03:33.300 the panel of Thomas More Society Attorneys.

00:03:36.080 Please give them a huge round of applause.

00:03:40.820 Thank you, David.

00:03:45.700 Great to see all of you here.

00:03:46.880 Thank you for being here.

00:03:48.100 Thanks for being interested in our work.

00:03:50.580 I'm going to start off by delivering a message.

00:03:52.320 Then I have a big announcement.

00:03:53.360 And then I get to introduce a panel of superstar lawyers

00:03:55.980 that I'm honored to be up here on stage with.

00:03:58.240 First, a message from our founder, Tom Brekka.

00:04:01.020 He gives his regards.

00:04:02.220 He would like to be here himself if he could,

00:04:04.080 but he can't be here this year.

00:04:06.340 Why don't we, he may be watching.

00:04:08.900 Why don't we give him a round of applause?

00:04:10.820 Well, as you know, back in 1986,

00:04:18.900 the National Organization for Women sued Joe Scheidler

00:04:22.160 and a bunch of pro-life activists all across the country,

00:04:25.500 alleging that they had engaged in racketeering

00:04:28.880 in violation of federal law.

00:04:30.840 And Thomas was retained.

00:04:32.560 He was in private practice at the time.

00:04:34.380 He took on that case,

00:04:35.680 eventually transitioned out of private practice,

00:04:38.020 founding the Thomas Moore Society.

00:04:39.940 And over the course of 28 years,

00:04:41.840 that case went to the Supreme Court three times,

00:04:44.180 ultimately resulting in a unanimous victory

00:04:46.240 for the Thomas Moore Society

00:04:47.360 and for the pro-life movement.

00:04:48.840 Now, the thing that I'm happy to be able to stand here

00:04:56.860 and announce tonight is that this is our 25th anniversary.

00:05:00.460 It was 25 years ago that Tom incorporated

00:05:02.820 the Thomas Moore Society and we got off the ground.

00:05:05.800 At the beginning, it was one lawyer and one case.

00:05:08.180 And now we have still headquartered in Chicago.

00:05:10.580 We have offices all across the country

00:05:11.940 and lawyers spread across the country.

00:05:13.220 And we have cases pending in courtrooms

00:05:15.020 literally from coast to coast

00:05:16.880 that we're handling all at the same time.

00:05:18.980 And we owe that to Tom Brekka.

00:05:26.420 Now, one of the very satisfying aspects of this job

00:05:29.560 is that we get to sue states like New York

00:05:32.560 and Illinois and California

00:05:34.080 and do it over and over and over again.

00:05:36.820 And that's some of the work

00:05:38.060 that we're going to describe to you here.

00:05:39.460 You're used to seeing four Thomas Moore Society lawyers

00:05:43.920 on this panel.

00:05:45.340 And we have some special guests today.

00:05:47.460 We have some distinguished lawyers

00:05:50.320 who are helping us with a particularly interesting case

00:05:53.580 that you're going to hear about tonight.

00:05:56.060 I think we have, since we have so much fun doing it,

00:05:58.740 I'd like to introduce my colleague, Tom Olk,

00:06:01.980 who is handling two of our really important cases

00:06:04.560 challenging state overreach

00:06:07.280 and abuse of government power.

00:06:08.900 Tom, come on.

00:06:09.460 Thank you very much.

00:06:15.580 I kind of think that my claim to fame

00:06:18.700 is I'm involved with cases that, like, never end.

00:06:21.820 So I came to Thomas Moore Society in 2015.

00:06:25.520 And in 2016, the great state of Illinois,

00:06:29.120 you know, a deep blue state,

00:06:30.680 passed a law that says that pregnancy centers

00:06:33.600 have to give the benefits of abortion

00:06:36.220 to the women they counsel.

00:06:38.580 How about that for a law, you know,

00:06:43.600 bringing into conflict the First Amendment?

00:06:47.260 So in 2016, we sued to stop that law.

00:06:54.280 And a preliminary injunction was entered in 2017.

00:06:58.560 And then the law, the case began to be litigated.

00:07:04.020 We waited for a decision in Nifla v. Becerra,

00:07:09.040 went round and round, filed for summary judgment.

00:07:11.720 It was denied by the chief judge in the Northern District of Illinois.

00:07:17.340 And then finally, this fall, we finally had a trial

00:07:21.120 before the judge, Ian Johnston, out in Rockford, Illinois.

00:07:24.920 So we finally finished our briefing and we're waiting for a decision on this case.

00:07:30.200 We hired some good experts and we're hopeful that we're going to win this case.

00:07:35.140 Seems to be an obvious violation of the First Amendment.

00:07:38.620 But this is what we're facing here in Illinois.

00:07:41.340 In New York, a similar kind of situation where we had to wait three years

00:07:48.040 for a decision from the Second Circuit on the case that we were litigating there.

00:07:56.020 It involved the scope of an injunction.

00:08:00.040 And way back in the Operation Rescue days,

00:08:03.600 that would be the late 1980s and early 1990s,

00:08:07.900 there were activities that were conducted in Rochester, New York,

00:08:12.840 and Buffalo, New York, that led to an injunction that was finalized in 2005.

00:08:18.040 And our client came in 2017, Jim Havens, and his group.

00:08:24.720 And they had no involvement with the named parties of that injunction.

00:08:29.960 And yet the police and Planned Parenthood there at that location in Rochester told them,

00:08:36.400 you can't cross the buffer line that the injunction imposed.

00:08:41.360 It's a global injunction.

00:08:43.360 They contacted the Thomas More Society and we looked up the law,

00:08:47.100 went back to a case in 1930 called Alamite and decided by an eminent jurist learned hand

00:08:58.280 that said, you're only liable, if you're not a named party in an injunction,

00:09:04.100 you're only liable and bound by it if you aid and abet a named party to violate the injunction.

00:09:10.140 We told the city of Rochester this.

00:09:14.000 They said, okay, we'll let you guys alone.

00:09:17.240 And then the state of New York got involved, Letitia James' people.

00:09:22.520 They reversed that decision and said, we think you're in bed with the bad guys.

00:09:28.800 And they said, we're going to arrest you guys if you cross that buffer line.

00:09:33.400 We filed a lawsuit and it was denied.

00:09:38.180 Our case was dismissed with prejudice.

00:09:41.380 And we said, this is crazy.

00:09:43.360 So we appealed to the Second Circuit.

00:09:45.580 And as I just said, we had to wait three years for a decision.

00:09:50.120 That decision came down last August.

00:09:52.800 We won.

00:09:53.420 The dismissal was reversed.

00:10:00.320 And now we're finally sitting down with the state and the city to try and work out our differences

00:10:06.420 and have a modus vivendi at that abortion clinic there, Planned Parenthood in Rochester.

00:10:14.820 So our sidewalk counselors will be able to do their job effectively.

00:10:18.680 So the theme of my few words here today is justice takes a long time to work out.

00:10:29.160 And I have to say that if you're careful and you hang in and persevere, then you're liable to win out.

00:10:38.880 The kind of primary example of that is the Nau v. Scheidler case that our founder, Tom Brackett, was involved in.

00:10:46.580 Guess how long it took.

00:10:48.680 28 years and three times to the Supreme Court.

00:10:53.320 So we here at Thomas More, we're here for the long term.

00:11:00.660 We're going to work hard to win these cases because, you know, there's a stiff wind, as you know, against the pro-life movement.

00:11:09.820 So we're well aware of that and proceeding knowing that.

00:11:14.980 So anyway, that's enough of my for me.

00:11:18.260 I turn it over to Peter Breen, who's a colleague and has similar stories, I think.

00:11:24.640 Thank you, Tom.

00:11:29.920 And my name is Peter Breen.

00:11:31.760 I'm your executive vice president, head of litigation for Thomas More Society.

00:11:35.400 You know, last year at this time, we were frantically preparing to defend Mark Houck in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in downtown Philadelphia.

00:11:46.260 And praise God, we were able to get a not guilty verdict in that case and absolutely lay one on the Biden Department of Justice.

00:11:54.260 But I will tell you, you know, we have, you know, the stakes are only higher with each passing month.

00:12:02.620 You know, and David B. Wright referred to the fact that, you know, abortion, we had, you know, we had hoped the abortion rates would continue to go down.

00:12:09.500 They've kind of bottomed out, and we were seeing a little bit of an upswing.

00:12:13.460 And I'll tell you, you know, you're hearing a lot tonight about California, Illinois, and New York.

00:12:21.660 And maybe California and New York are obvious to you because they're big abortion states, have been since pre-Roe, and they're just large states generally.

00:12:29.820 The reason you're also going to hear about Illinois, not just because we happen to be headquartered there in the middle of the country, which gives us easy access to both ends of the country, but it's because the abortion rate in Illinois has absolutely skyrocketed.

00:12:44.500 And if you look at the month-by-month data that is coming out lately, Illinois is on track to double its abortion rate from before Dobbs.

00:12:55.360 So you're looking at Illinois, possibly, maybe even getting into the number three slot in the country, even though Illinois is, what, a quarter of the size of California, a third of the size of California, half the size of New York and Florida, probably going to be right up there at 100,000 abortions a year, possibly, from a traditional rate of about 40.

00:13:15.400 And so you're seeing this, though, this is this divide in the country, the red state versus blue state.

00:13:20.760 And I don't mean to use those politically, I mean to use them in the pro-life terminology, maybe.

00:13:25.360 And so for us at Thomas More Society, you know, the idea of representing sidewalk counselors and helping pregnancy centers and the movement to fight states where abortion is legal, you know, that's kind of the thing we were doing before Dobbs.

00:13:40.440 But the vigor with which these states, these blue states are coming after our people, has intensified times 10.

00:13:50.920 I mean, and you see, we had already seen under the Obama administration, you know, there's somewhat of a disregard for the rule of law, a disregard for proper process and principles.

00:14:01.800 And so that they would think, well, you know, we don't want to do it to you because then it'll be done back to us.

00:14:05.760 Now they just don't care in these states for the most part.

00:14:09.780 And so you see that in the blue states, you know, the red states, the pro-life states, we're having wonderful success.

00:14:16.080 You know, we'd like to do a little more.

00:14:17.800 We're helping people with drafting legislation, but we're doing offensive work.

00:14:20.940 But it's really those blue states right now where we are focusing our efforts because they are undertaking in particular, so not just, say, the face case violations, which you're going to hear about as well from my colleague Martin Cannon.

00:14:36.820 We've got to face act prosecutions, both civil and criminal, that we are defending across the country, both against the Department of Justice and against state attorneys general.

00:14:45.500 But they're coming after pregnancy centers. 0.92

00:14:48.120 And really, when you think about it, it makes a lot of sense.

00:14:52.680 And as part of the effort, say, I want to give you a case study in Illinois because it's a wonderful victory that was just won.

00:15:01.680 But it's against the most recent brand of anti-pregnancy center legislation that is going through the states.

00:15:08.520 They're trying to stop the pregnancy centers from doing their work generally. 0.91

00:15:13.580 You know, and these are small nonprofits.

00:15:14.700 So if you impose a lot of legal restrictions and the threats of fines or even jail time or what have you, folks just recede.

00:15:24.080 You know, they're volunteers for the most part.

00:15:25.540 They might not have enough money or legal resources to combat, you know, the entire weight of the sovereign state of California or New York or Illinois.

00:15:32.480 But they are doing this work, really attacking pregnancy centers in a couple of ways.

00:15:39.700 And the newest way that this is being framed as is they are that pregnancy centers are violating your state deceptive practices act.

00:15:49.540 So, in other words, it's this whole business.

00:15:51.220 The other side doesn't want to engage on the issues.

00:15:53.460 They just say, oh, you're lying.

00:15:54.840 You're lying.

00:15:55.300 And in particular, they're challenging things like our characterization of abortion.

00:16:02.140 In the state of Illinois, we had a bill this past year called Senate Bill 1909.

00:16:07.420 It was enacted at the behest of Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raul, who was a liberal Democrat and proudly signed by Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, a name you may know because he is on the short list of Democratic presidential candidates, multi-billionaire, you know, heir to the Hyatt family fortune.

00:16:27.060 And so that law declared that pregnancy centers were overstating the risks of abortion and using misinformation.

00:16:38.320 Gosh, where have we heard that lately?

00:16:40.740 You know, but putting it into state statute and even saying, well, the pregnancy centers are saying falsely that abortion could lead to infertility.

00:16:52.000 Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is a pretty well-educated pro-life room.

00:16:55.840 I mean, if you botch an abortion, oftentimes it could lead to infertility.

00:17:00.440 But they didn't even care.

00:17:01.640 And you were sitting there, you're just looking at them going, what are you people thinking?

00:17:06.160 And then, you know, they were trying to, you know, peddle lies like, oh, well, you know, childbirth is much more dangerous than a surgical abortion, which is outlandish.

00:17:17.280 And most of us, you know, we've seen the studies, we've debunked them, what have you.

00:17:21.120 But they enacted this into law.

00:17:23.680 So they essentially put into law saying what we know to be false is true and you must adhere to it.

00:17:30.820 And if you don't, we're going to subject you to $50,000 fines, ruinous investigations.

00:17:36.300 We're going to issue subpoenas on you and what have you. 0.52

00:17:38.840 And this was looking like an existential threat to the pregnancy center movement in Illinois in particular.

00:17:44.720 But it's a similar law has been enacted in states like Connecticut and Vermont and other places like that.

00:17:52.320 So we desperately fought when we were thinking we've got to beat this in Illinois because it's probably the worst of its kind in the country in hopes of stopping it in other states.

00:18:01.180 It's also being considered in certain other state legislatures.

00:18:04.080 Well, we were able and showed what the pro-life movement can do, even in a blue state, even when you're down two to one in your legislature.

00:18:10.500 Our activists on the ground were working the phones.

00:18:14.820 Folks put lots of witness slips in.

00:18:17.060 We had 17,000 witness slips against this bill, 3,000 in favor.

00:18:20.780 And we had the right people testifying.

00:18:22.900 We had the right record come in.

00:18:24.700 The legislators, the good pro-life core there in the Illinois General Assembly, were asking the right questions.

00:18:30.800 They did the good floor debate.

00:18:32.020 And then we, as the lawyers, were able to look and go, hey, let's get this evidence in.

00:18:36.480 We filed, you know, with our friends at the Pro-Life Action League, who became our clients in this case, because the law also impacted sidewalk counselors.

00:18:43.080 We filed FOIA requests and got documents to help make our case.

00:18:47.500 At the end of the day, as against the attorney general who had claimed, we've had scores of reports and complaints about your deceptive practices, you pregnancy centers. 0.94

00:18:57.080 Our evidence, FOIA request results, showed there had actually been no complaints, not a single one in 10 years.

00:19:04.840 And so we took all of this to the federal district court in the Northern District of Illinois.

00:19:08.800 So the bill was signed on July 27th at noon.

00:19:13.880 We filed our lawsuit and sought a preliminary and permanent injunction at 1 p.m.

00:19:18.680 And at 2 p.m., the attorney general got up to talk about his wonderful bill.

00:19:21.820 And, ladies and gentlemen, I put this to you because it's important to see us actually score points in a blue state.

00:19:29.080 The AG got one softball question at his press conference, and every other question was about our lawsuit, about what the pro-life movement was doing.

00:19:36.280 And we were able to reframe that debate and really reshape the way this thing was being covered in a hard blue state like Illinois.

00:19:43.900 Yeah, and that is something to be proud of.

00:19:46.240 Sorry.

00:19:48.720 I'm not leaving you time to applaud.

00:19:50.700 I'm sorry.

00:19:51.740 I'm a politician, too, or a reformed politician.

00:19:55.020 But I'll tell you, a week later, we get a hearing, and we're there in the district court, six-hour hearing.

00:20:02.560 We had our friends from NIFLA were one of the parties there and flew in from New Jersey.

00:20:08.720 We had the folks from the Pro-Life Action League there, local pro-life sidewalk counseling group, another local pregnancy center.

00:20:15.860 Had them up on the stand.

00:20:17.000 We asked a lot of questions.

00:20:18.320 The judge was asking a lot of questions.

00:20:19.600 He was very engaged.

00:20:21.380 And at the end of the hearing, Thursday night, 6 o'clock, he gives us a preliminary injunction against that law.

00:20:27.960 And it was a wonderful victory. 0.93

00:20:31.020 And he then issued his written decision the next day, and he said, you know, sometimes there are laws where Justice Scalia had said, you know, I wish I had a stamp that said, this law is stupid, but it's constitutional. 0.99

00:20:41.820 And the judge said, well, this one's stupid, and it's unconstitutional. 0.99

00:20:45.740 And so that was a wonderful victory for us. 0.99

00:20:48.540 And wouldn't you know it, the state of Illinois came back, said, we're going to take 25 depositions, four expert witnesses.

00:20:53.780 We're going to put you through the wringer.

00:20:55.700 Well, a few weeks later, and a little more, you know, we kind of fought back on them on a lot of these things.

00:21:02.980 They have now since agreed to drop the law, agree to a permanent injunction, and pay us our attorney's fees for the trouble.

00:21:11.980 So, yeah, I give you that look.

00:21:16.320 I mean, that one, this was a good win.

00:21:18.520 It was a good, hard win.

00:21:19.660 And frankly, you know, we started the year with Mark Houck winning, you know, when we got the right jury seated, it was an hour, not guilty, up against the DOJ that has a 98, 99% win rate.

00:21:29.200 And we're kind of closing the year with this incredible win in Illinois, where we just absolutely, you know, cleaned their clocks, got them to admit it, and stopped one of the worst laws against pregnancy centers in the country.

00:21:39.000 I do that to show you we can win these fights, and we take the opportunities and absolutely drive it home.

00:21:46.380 I'll tell you, you know, every time Merrick Garland gets in front of Congress, they ask him about Mark Houck, still.

00:21:52.140 And they're going to keep asking him about it.

00:21:53.880 And in Illinois, it's an absolute black eye.

00:21:56.760 So every time the parole boards get up there and want to run another bill, you know, the legislators are kind of privately grumbling on, are you going to get us sued again?

00:22:03.260 Are we going to get embarrassed again?

00:22:04.460 And so this is the sort of thing that we're glad and, you know, honored to be able to do for you and pleased to be able to do.

00:22:10.760 We're going to keep doing it in the year to come.

00:22:12.580 You know, we've got challenges in California, state of California.

00:22:15.760 The California Attorney General has sued Heartbeat International.

00:22:19.040 I mean, the mega pregnancy center network of 3,000 centers, which does wonderful work, they want to shut down abortion pill reversal,

00:22:26.900 saying it's, again, a deceptive practice to help people try to save their babies when they decide that they don't want to have an abortion anymore.

00:22:34.720 So we are working very hard in that.

00:22:36.620 You're going to hear more about that in the months to come.

00:22:39.480 But, again, I just thank you so much.

00:22:41.100 Please keep the faith.

00:22:42.140 And, again, think of these great victories, and let's hope we get a few more in this year to come.

00:22:46.160 Thank you.

00:22:46.480 Thank you, Peter.

00:22:53.500 It's great to have big wins to crow about.

00:22:56.160 We're proud of our victories, and we are in the process of filing more lawsuits to deliver more victories.

00:23:04.100 Several years ago, New York passed its awful RHA, and our phones exploded.

00:23:10.160 We got calls from New York asking us to do something.

00:23:13.760 Other law firms were engaged, and everybody said there was nothing that lawyers could do about this.

00:23:21.060 Well, we thought long and hard and decided we're going to be creative,

00:23:24.020 and that's why we have two esteemed guest lawyers up here to tell you about what we ended up doing in New York and what we're doing now.

00:23:33.800 Michelle Sturlus-Acorsi is the executive director of Feminist Choosing Life of New York.

00:23:39.220 They weren't satisfied passing the awful RHA bill through the legislature.

00:23:46.120 Now they have a ballot initiative to enshrine abortion in their constitution.

00:23:49.640 Michelle is a campaign consultant to the Coalition to Protect Kids New York,

00:23:54.940 which was commissioned to defeat the New York Equal Rights Amendment,

00:24:00.080 which is their pro-abortion ballot initiative.

00:24:02.440 Michelle is a lawyer herself, a mom, and a very effective pro-life activist.

00:24:08.900 Michelle, come on up. 0.98

00:24:19.840 Thank you, Andy.

00:24:21.920 I'm going to read my brief comments here quickly.

00:24:24.700 On January 22nd, 2019, the New York State Legislature enacted the Reproductive Health Act, or the RHA,

00:24:34.460 an abortion expansion policy that for years had been held at bay by only a few votes in the New York State Senate.

00:24:44.320 Former New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo, in office at the time,

00:24:48.380 lit up the World Trade Center in pink to celebrate the passage of the RHA,

00:24:55.320 an historical achievement according to pro-abortion special interests,

00:25:00.500 but a move towards death and danger for unborn children and pregnant women.

00:25:06.240 The RHA in New York dehumanizes unborn children and jeopardizes the health and well-being of women.

00:25:13.960 Among other things, the RHA repealed New York's long-standing fetal homicide law

00:25:22.300 and created a new definition of person under New York criminal law,

00:25:27.640 which excludes all unborn children, including viable unborn children,

00:25:33.700 from the legal definition of persons who can be victims of homicide.

00:25:39.100 The change altered nearly 200 years of New York law.

00:25:43.100 The RHA permits killing children capable of surviving outside of the wombs of their mothers

00:25:50.980 with or without medical intervention for reasons wholly unrelated to any threat

00:25:58.220 to their mother's physical life or health.

00:26:02.080 Essentially, the RHA permits on-demand abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy.

00:26:07.680 The RHA repealed New York's long-standing requirement that only duly licensed physicians perform abortions

00:26:17.160 and permits a largely undefined category of health care professionals

00:26:23.640 to perform any and all abortions, including later second- and third-trimester abortions,

00:26:30.940 nearly 2,000 of which occur in New York on average annually.

00:26:38.620 Shortly after the passage of the RHA, Feminists Choosing Life of New York 1.00

00:26:42.800 organized a legal team to explore the legality of this law.

00:26:48.560 The legal team, led by the most brilliant attorney, Theresa Collette, here today,

00:26:53.320 who will speak to you all after me, discovered several areas to attack the RHA

00:26:59.920 that would protect children and women.

00:27:03.480 Our incredible, incredible friends at the Thomas More Society took on the matter

00:27:08.600 and shortly thereafter filed a class-action lawsuit against the RHA

00:27:15.020 on behalf of vulnerable victim plaintiffs.

00:27:19.640 The class-action lawsuit, titled Smith v. Hochul,

00:27:23.740 filed on several U.S. constitutional grounds,

00:27:27.560 represented the first time a New York abortion law was challenged

00:27:32.760 for violating both women's rights and the rights of unborn children.

00:27:38.000 Among other things, the lawsuit claims the RHA deprives viable unborn children

00:27:44.920 of their right to live free from lethal violence

00:27:49.220 and incentivizes domestic and intimate partner violence against pregnant women.

00:27:56.800 Plaintiffs challenged two portions of the RHA,

00:28:00.640 claiming these two provisions violated three constitutional protections,

00:28:05.760 substantive due process, equal protection, and the right to legal red dress.

00:28:12.780 As expected, the case was dismissed by the lower court,

00:28:16.520 as are the majority of challenges to abortion laws in the United States.

00:28:22.180 Most notable, however, the federal district court where the case was filed

00:28:27.600 agreed with plaintiffs that there is a substantial likelihood

00:28:32.960 that by eliminating the fetal homicide law,

00:28:37.320 the RHA reduced disincentives for violence against pregnant women,

00:28:43.560 making it more likely that third parties will inflict violence against pregnant women.

00:28:50.020 Further, the lower court declined to rule

00:28:52.580 on whether viable unborn children can be represented,

00:28:57.340 holding instead that neither the proposed representatives in the complaint

00:29:03.120 nor the attorneys for the children could speak on their behalf.

00:29:08.100 On April 21st, 2023, the matter was taken up on appeal

00:29:12.980 before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals,

00:29:17.020 where oral argument is expected to occur in February of this year.

00:29:21.860 The appeal involved is ultimately asking the court,

00:29:26.340 and Teresa will go into further detail,

00:29:29.220 to recognize the right to life for viable unborn children

00:29:33.860 under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,

00:29:38.260 a right for these children to live free from violent destruction

00:29:42.340 at the hands of criminals attacking pregnant women

00:29:45.880 and from those who would kill them at the request of their mothers,

00:29:49.820 and to identify who can speak on behalf of viable unborn children

00:29:55.560 in a court of law,

00:29:57.260 exactly who can present their claim to live free from violent destruction.

00:30:03.520 This case is a fight for the voiceless,

00:30:06.540 a chance to rehumanize unborn children,

00:30:10.440 an opportunity to protect more kids from death,

00:30:14.500 a chance to protect pregnant women from violence. 0.74

00:30:17.680 Smith v. Hochul is potentially one step closer to the U.S. Supreme Court,

00:30:23.420 and please pray that we will prevail.

00:30:25.780 Thank you.

00:30:26.300 Thank you, Michelle.

00:30:34.760 Thank you.

00:30:35.200 Thank you.

00:30:36.760 It was very frustrating that within days of the passage of the RHA in New York,

00:30:41.040 a number of law firms announced that there was nothing lawyers could do about it,

00:30:44.540 and we knew it was going to be quite a challenge,

00:30:47.060 and we realized that we were different than those other law firms in many ways,

00:30:54.600 one of which is we have Teresa Collette in our corner. 0.99

00:30:57.760 And we turned to Professor Collette, and she has come through.

00:31:01.980 Now, we're going to get into some detailed law talk here

00:31:05.620 so that we can understand just what a steep climb we took on,

00:31:13.160 and we're real proud that we are the one prosecuting this lawsuit.

00:31:19.340 Now, Teresa is a professor of law at the University of St. Thomas,

00:31:23.580 where she directs the Pro-Life Law Center there.

00:31:26.660 She teaches constitutional law and bioethics.

00:31:29.120 She served as assistant attorney general for the states of Oklahoma and Kansas,

00:31:32.400 and she frequently represents states who are defending their pro-life laws.

00:31:37.060 Teresa, come on up here. 1.00

00:31:43.900 I wasn't aware that my mother had called everybody on the panel.

00:31:48.580 That very generous introduction overstates the case

00:31:52.500 because working with both Michelle and with the Thomas Moore lawyers

00:31:56.520 has just been a delight, and I've learned a lot from them,

00:31:59.240 so I'm very fortunate to be working as a part of their team on this matter.

00:32:04.680 But I am going to sort of geek out on the law,

00:32:07.880 so for those of you who are not lawyers in the room

00:32:10.640 or don't aspire to be lawyers, forgive me.

00:32:12.960 I'll try to keep it reasonably understandable,

00:32:15.680 but for the law students, pay attention.

00:32:19.440 Let's start with a recent debate that occurred in National Review

00:32:24.240 between Clark Forsythe and, not Josh Blackman, but Craddock, Josh Craddock.

00:32:32.440 And the question was,

00:32:34.420 is personhood the right next battle for the pro-life movement?

00:32:39.500 When we took this case up on appeal,

00:32:42.900 the trial court, as Michelle said,

00:32:45.140 had declined to answer whether or not unborn children

00:32:48.380 could ever have a guardian ad litem or a legal representative,

00:32:52.160 and there's a good reason for that,

00:32:54.420 because there's a long, multi-century history

00:32:57.980 of unborn children having guardian ad litems or next friends,

00:33:02.600 particularly in probate and trust.

00:33:05.100 And so to say that unborn children

00:33:06.600 can never have legal representatives

00:33:08.160 would simply be to defy two centuries of law.

00:33:12.400 Instead, the judge said,

00:33:14.800 I am reserving that question,

00:33:16.160 but the person that you have nominated

00:33:19.800 to be that legal representative

00:33:21.840 doesn't have a sufficient relationship

00:33:25.180 with the unborn children

00:33:27.380 who are members of this class,

00:33:29.760 so she can't be appointed.

00:33:33.160 We argued that, Your Honor,

00:33:35.480 the fact that she counsels women

00:33:37.260 who are in violent relationships,

00:33:39.160 women who are being coerced

00:33:41.760 regarding continuation of their pregnancy,

00:33:44.040 gives her a sufficient relationship. 0.62

00:33:47.260 And the judge said,

00:33:48.200 no, I don't believe that's so.

00:33:50.220 I said, well, in the event that's not true, Your Honor,

00:33:52.600 there is multiple precedent

00:33:55.320 for the lawyers in the case

00:33:58.520 to represent those individuals.

00:34:01.020 So consider us the legal representatives.

00:34:04.300 Now, the reason this is important

00:34:05.520 is because you have to have someone

00:34:07.700 legally competent to speak in court.

00:34:11.620 and unborn children can't speak on their own behalf.

00:34:15.120 By avoiding appointing anyone,

00:34:18.080 what the court essentially did is say

00:34:20.040 that children,

00:34:22.280 their right to plead for their lives

00:34:24.460 before the court

00:34:25.340 is conditioned upon the court

00:34:28.420 being willing to grant them a representative.

00:34:32.380 This cannot be the law.

00:34:35.380 Every American has a right

00:34:37.400 to appear in court and plead their case.

00:34:39.940 So we took it up on appeal

00:34:42.600 on that specific issue.

00:34:45.140 Was a special relationship

00:34:46.900 under these circumstances required?

00:34:50.100 And if so,

00:34:50.740 had we adequately established it?

00:34:53.640 The New York Attorney General

00:34:55.160 changed the question,

00:34:56.700 which was a very interesting move on their part.

00:35:01.480 He changed the question in that

00:35:03.880 he came back and said,

00:35:06.540 she came back,

00:35:07.360 I'm sorry,

00:35:07.720 Letitia James came back and said, 0.99

00:35:09.400 whether there's enough of a relationship or not

00:35:12.620 is irrelevant

00:35:13.260 because they're not constitutional persons.

00:35:17.760 So they can't make constitutional claims.

00:35:21.320 Now, the law students in the room

00:35:22.960 will remember that one of the holdings

00:35:25.180 in Roe versus Wade

00:35:26.200 was in fact,

00:35:28.340 can unborn children

00:35:29.940 be considered constitutional persons

00:35:32.380 for purposes of the 14th Amendment?

00:35:34.320 And so the entire defense of the appeal

00:35:38.060 on the part of New York

00:35:40.120 was that Roe said

00:35:42.340 they're not constitutional persons

00:35:44.220 and therefore you're not obligated

00:35:46.260 to appoint a representative.

00:35:47.780 They can't make these claims.

00:35:49.580 And so we're done.

00:35:52.740 What's interesting is

00:35:54.140 that of course,

00:35:55.440 Dobbs overruled Roe in toto.

00:35:59.140 The concurring opinion

00:36:02.120 by Chief Justice Roberts

00:36:03.520 basically pleaded with the majority.

00:36:05.900 Please don't do that.

00:36:06.980 Just overrule it partially.

00:36:08.320 Let's do this gradually.

00:36:09.500 Let's be very careful.

00:36:11.400 And Justice Alito said,

00:36:12.620 no,

00:36:13.160 no,

00:36:14.360 it's gone in toto,

00:36:17.000 which is our reply brief.

00:36:19.420 That in fact,

00:36:20.820 the question

00:36:21.800 of the personhood

00:36:23.420 of the unborn

00:36:24.480 as of Dobbs

00:36:26.640 is now an open question again

00:36:28.820 in federal courts.

00:36:31.080 And we learned

00:36:32.860 from the abortion industry.

00:36:34.860 Our complaint ran 120 pages

00:36:37.300 and had expert declarations

00:36:40.140 that were attached

00:36:41.640 that established

00:36:42.620 the biological identity

00:36:44.540 of these unborn children

00:36:47.280 as human beings

00:36:48.640 and in being,

00:36:51.740 which were the requirements

00:36:52.920 of a U.S. Supreme Court

00:36:55.100 just five years

00:36:56.360 before Roe v. Wade

00:36:57.640 when the question

00:36:58.740 was whether or not

00:36:59.420 illegitimate children 0.78

00:37:00.400 in Virginia

00:37:01.160 had a right to inherit.

00:37:03.100 And the court said,

00:37:04.520 Virginia said

00:37:05.440 they're non-persons

00:37:06.420 because they're not legitimate.

00:37:07.800 And the court said,

00:37:09.200 no,

00:37:10.040 they are not non-persons

00:37:11.540 because

00:37:11.900 they're human beings

00:37:13.900 and they're in being.

00:37:15.860 We meet that qualification.

00:37:18.980 Is the court ready

00:37:20.460 in the Second Circuit

00:37:21.680 to give us a ruling

00:37:23.380 that our tiny,

00:37:25.520 tiny clients

00:37:26.320 are in fact

00:37:28.240 constitutional persons

00:37:30.560 for the 14th Amendment?

00:37:32.620 We pray they are.

00:37:35.640 But if the court isn't ready,

00:37:37.780 we've at least begun

00:37:39.120 to lay the groundwork

00:37:40.860 because any law student

00:37:42.620 can tell you

00:37:43.360 the main way

00:37:44.680 you get to the U.S. Supreme Court

00:37:46.040 is where you have

00:37:46.940 a split of authority

00:37:48.040 in various circuit courts.

00:37:51.500 And I think

00:37:52.280 the Fifth Circuit

00:37:53.020 is our next stop

00:37:54.080 if we need to get

00:37:55.220 that split of authority.

00:37:56.600 Thank you.

00:37:57.060 Thank you, Teresa.

00:38:05.020 We need your prayer support

00:38:06.140 for that lawsuit

00:38:07.320 and for all of the others

00:38:09.800 for that matter.

00:38:13.020 Back in the 80s,

00:38:15.380 there was a practice

00:38:17.880 that spread nationwide

00:38:18.740 of doing sit-ins

00:38:19.700 at abortion clinics

00:38:20.440 and shutting them down.

00:38:21.400 You physically obstruct

00:38:22.180 the entrance

00:38:22.580 so they can't get in,

00:38:23.340 they can't do business.

00:38:24.080 That the magnitude

00:38:27.340 of those sit-ins grew

00:38:28.360 so that by 1991

00:38:30.160 we had the Summer of Mercy

00:38:31.300 at George Tiller's Clinic

00:38:32.340 in Wichita, Kansas.

00:38:33.520 92 we had

00:38:34.440 where then

00:38:35.800 hundreds of people showed up

00:38:37.140 and dozens were arrested

00:38:38.140 every day.

00:38:39.480 The next summer

00:38:40.400 it spread to Milwaukee

00:38:41.640 and other cities

00:38:42.200 where thousands would show up

00:38:44.040 and hundreds would be arrested

00:38:44.920 in a day

00:38:46.040 and then they'd be processed,

00:38:47.340 charged with trespassing

00:38:49.040 or disturbing the peace

00:38:49.920 and processed

00:38:50.740 and come back the next day

00:38:51.940 and do it again.

00:38:52.920 And they were very public

00:38:54.140 about what their intent was

00:38:55.160 and what they were doing.

00:38:56.700 Then in 1993,

00:39:00.620 Dr. Tiller was shot

00:39:02.860 in the arm in Wichita

00:39:03.640 and Dr. David Gunn

00:39:04.760 was shot to death

00:39:05.380 in Pensacola

00:39:06.000 and Teddy Kennedy

00:39:07.380 introduced the FACE Act

00:39:08.380 in the Senate

00:39:09.380 and Chuck Schumer

00:39:10.360 introduced it in the House

00:39:11.380 and it was assigned

00:39:12.980 into law in 1994.

00:39:15.040 So who here,

00:39:16.260 let's see a show of hands,

00:39:17.180 has heard of this obscure

00:39:18.260 federal law

00:39:19.060 called the FACE Act?

00:39:21.340 Yes, pretty much everybody.

00:39:22.920 Now, under our scheme

00:39:24.340 of separation of powers,

00:39:26.500 those powers,

00:39:27.200 known as the police powers,

00:39:28.480 are generally reserved

00:39:29.980 to the states.

00:39:31.040 So if you are tried

00:39:31.980 for murder,

00:39:33.260 rape,

00:39:34.080 robbery,

00:39:34.660 assault and battery,

00:39:35.600 you're probably going

00:39:36.260 to be tried

00:39:36.640 in a state court

00:39:37.380 under state law.

00:39:38.940 Now there are exceptions

00:39:39.720 if you commit your crime

00:39:40.920 on federal property

00:39:41.740 than you might be

00:39:42.480 in federal court.

00:39:43.420 But generally,

00:39:43.980 that's how things work.

00:39:45.140 Now they pass the FACE Act 0.55

00:39:46.340 and of course,

00:39:47.140 I'm asking the question,

00:39:48.420 where do they get off

00:39:49.180 thinking they have the power

00:39:50.060 to do that?

00:39:51.480 And so we're going

00:39:51.920 to tell you about

00:39:52.320 how our efforts

00:39:53.320 to have the FACE Act

00:39:54.220 declared unconstitutional.

00:39:56.100 Now at the same time,

00:39:57.380 there's been a bill

00:39:58.120 introduced in Congress

00:39:59.140 to repeal the FACE Act

00:40:01.360 and there's been

00:40:02.140 an appropriations amendment

00:40:03.380 introduced

00:40:03.840 to defund the FACE Act.

00:40:05.820 So I'm not sure

00:40:07.880 if we can get that

00:40:08.420 through Congress

00:40:08.920 as it currently stands,

00:40:10.760 but it's good

00:40:11.640 that it's there.

00:40:12.700 Congress itself

00:40:13.500 is questioning

00:40:14.200 the constitutionality

00:40:15.300 of the FACE Act.

00:40:15.920 that's the justification,

00:40:17.020 the motivation

00:40:18.080 for filing this bill.

00:40:20.200 We have a number

00:40:21.560 of FACE Act cases

00:40:22.520 that we are defending

00:40:23.500 and they came in a wave

00:40:26.020 after the Dobbs decision

00:40:27.200 was rendered

00:40:27.700 when people were urging

00:40:30.440 the administration

00:40:31.420 to do something.

00:40:33.040 And so we've suffered

00:40:34.580 what I think

00:40:34.960 has had an egregious

00:40:36.560 abuse of government power

00:40:37.780 over this law

00:40:38.380 which is in constitution

00:40:39.280 in the first place

00:40:40.020 is being misused

00:40:40.860 against a lot of people

00:40:41.720 and we have a great number

00:40:46.800 of really skilled lawyers

00:40:48.260 that are pushing back

00:40:49.380 on this,

00:40:49.920 representing people

00:40:50.540 in courts

00:40:50.860 all across the country

00:40:51.660 and we have

00:40:52.860 our next speaker

00:40:54.160 is the guy

00:40:55.260 I call the king

00:40:56.280 of the sidewalks,

00:40:57.180 Martin Cannon.

00:40:58.020 Come on up here

00:40:58.540 and tell us

00:40:58.880 about the FACE Act.

00:41:09.060 Whenever you speak

00:41:09.980 after Andy Bath,

00:41:10.820 you've got to pull

00:41:11.280 the microphone back down.

00:41:14.200 I'm going to brag

00:41:15.260 for just a minute

00:41:15.800 about the Thomas More Society.

00:41:17.220 A few years ago,

00:41:18.140 there was actually

00:41:18.960 a pretty well-researched,

00:41:20.480 very pro-abortion article

00:41:23.240 put out by an outfit

00:41:24.300 I can't remember

00:41:25.060 but it was rather significant

00:41:26.300 and they researched

00:41:27.660 all the FACE cases

00:41:28.920 everywhere in the country

00:41:30.200 that had been prosecuted

00:41:31.640 since the FACE Act

00:41:33.000 was passed.

00:41:34.640 And at the time,

00:41:35.180 this is a couple years ago,

00:41:36.660 the government

00:41:37.280 or some government,

00:41:39.320 I think it included

00:41:40.100 state attorneys general

00:41:41.520 had prosecuted

00:41:43.160 right at 100

00:41:44.880 FACE cases

00:41:46.260 and they had won

00:41:47.840 95 of them.

00:41:49.960 The takeaway from that is

00:41:51.700 government doesn't lose

00:41:54.140 FACE cases.

00:41:55.300 Of the five

00:41:56.620 that the government

00:41:57.460 had lost,

00:41:58.560 three of them

00:41:59.440 were Thomas More cases.

00:42:00.660 And these aren't

00:42:06.400 small cases.

00:42:07.220 These aren't

00:42:07.660 something where

00:42:08.200 you go down the sidewalk

00:42:09.060 and you step into

00:42:09.880 the courtroom

00:42:10.300 and try your case

00:42:11.040 for half an hour

00:42:11.820 or an afternoon

00:42:12.560 and you get a verdict

00:42:13.760 and go home.

00:42:14.820 These take

00:42:15.620 months and months

00:42:16.840 of preparation,

00:42:17.700 hundreds of thousands

00:42:18.480 of dollars of expense,

00:42:20.160 not attorney fees,

00:42:21.400 maybe expense

00:42:22.040 paying local counsel

00:42:23.520 to be around.

00:42:25.340 Weeks and weeks

00:42:26.280 in hotel rooms

00:42:27.220 and taxis

00:42:27.900 and airfare

00:42:28.460 and stuff.

00:42:28.920 It's a big deal

00:42:29.980 when the U.S.

00:42:31.040 government

00:42:31.400 or any government

00:42:32.400 prosecutes a client

00:42:34.220 with something

00:42:34.740 that risks

00:42:35.320 10 years in prison.

00:42:37.540 So it's a big deal.

00:42:39.520 Since Dobbs,

00:42:41.180 and actually since

00:42:42.020 it became apparent

00:42:42.880 a little bit ahead of time

00:42:43.960 that Roe was going away,

00:42:45.980 the DOJ prosecution

00:42:47.400 of FACE cases

00:42:48.080 has exploded.

00:42:49.840 They created their own

00:42:51.220 separate FACE department

00:42:53.800 and they've got

00:42:54.680 their own FACE people

00:42:56.160 that are running

00:42:56.680 around the country

00:42:57.280 charging people

00:42:59.100 with the FACE Act

00:42:59.960 and trying those cases.

00:43:01.720 Now, since then,

00:43:02.920 we've won another one,

00:43:04.100 the Hout case

00:43:04.740 that you all know about.

00:43:06.360 I want to go quickly

00:43:07.440 to kind of go through

00:43:08.580 a rundown

00:43:09.060 of the TMS FACE cases

00:43:10.220 because it really creates

00:43:11.420 a big picture

00:43:11.980 that you have to see.

00:43:14.220 Father Westland,

00:43:15.140 this goes back

00:43:15.720 10 or 15 years,

00:43:16.840 Father Westland

00:43:17.520 was a Catholic priest

00:43:18.380 charged with FACE

00:43:19.360 because he went

00:43:19.940 into a clinic in Omaha

00:43:21.440 and kneeled down to pray.

00:43:23.820 You know,

00:43:23.980 terrible, violent crime.

00:43:26.980 The BS in the allegations

00:43:29.700 against him,

00:43:30.720 somewhat uniquely,

00:43:31.600 actually came in that case

00:43:32.720 from clinic escorts.

00:43:35.900 We won that case.

00:43:37.480 Tried it to a federal jury

00:43:38.860 over the course

00:43:39.420 of a week or so.

00:43:40.800 We won it.

00:43:42.440 The next one

00:43:43.220 was the Ken Scott case

00:43:44.660 in Colorado.

00:43:45.880 Interestingly,

00:43:46.440 this was under the Obama

00:43:47.400 administration

00:43:48.240 and the Obama administration

00:43:49.820 pretty much sent out

00:43:52.120 a memo to all their

00:43:53.200 local state U.S.

00:43:54.280 attorneys saying

00:43:55.320 when people

00:43:56.420 offer a pamphlet

00:43:58.360 to a car

00:43:59.120 going into a driveway

00:44:00.360 and that car stops,

00:44:02.840 that's blockage.

00:44:04.020 That's a FACE violation.

00:44:06.480 So we're going to

00:44:07.520 take this approach.

00:44:08.780 One of their first cases

00:44:09.720 on that was the

00:44:10.320 Ken Scott case

00:44:11.160 charging him with FACE

00:44:12.260 because he

00:44:12.900 was handing pamphlets

00:44:14.720 out to people

00:44:15.300 who voluntarily

00:44:16.220 stopped their cars.

00:44:17.160 When he didn't step

00:44:17.900 in front of the car

00:44:18.520 to force it to stop.

00:44:21.000 We won that case 0.99

00:44:22.420 and the tactic

00:44:24.000 kind of faded.

00:44:25.420 We still hear the argument

00:44:26.180 once in a while,

00:44:26.940 but it's not one

00:44:28.040 that the DOJ

00:44:28.720 is advancing anymore.

00:44:31.200 Our next case

00:44:32.180 was the Greep case

00:44:33.220 in New York.

00:44:33.900 It wasn't a DOJ case.

00:44:35.380 It was the New York

00:44:36.660 Attorney General,

00:44:38.000 probably the most powerful

00:44:39.660 Attorney General

00:44:40.340 in the country.

00:44:41.860 Their approach

00:44:42.900 was our clients

00:44:44.340 on a 16-foot-wide sidewalk

00:44:46.140 standing at the edges

00:44:47.560 of the sidewalk

00:44:48.660 leaving about 15 feet

00:44:51.060 available for people

00:44:52.280 to walk into the clinic.

00:44:53.380 Just their being there,

00:44:54.900 holding signs,

00:44:57.080 preaching a little bit

00:44:58.200 from the edge

00:44:59.440 of the sidewalk,

00:45:00.200 just their being there

00:45:01.200 was intimidation

00:45:02.160 and therefore

00:45:03.300 had to be

00:45:03.760 a FACE violation.

00:45:04.700 That Attorney General,

00:45:07.940 Ken,

00:45:08.440 or Schneiderman,

00:45:10.800 on the day

00:45:11.820 he filed that lawsuit,

00:45:12.780 he held a press conference

00:45:13.960 with all the abortionists

00:45:15.700 and escorts

00:45:16.520 and everybody

00:45:17.060 from the clinic

00:45:17.660 behind him

00:45:18.300 on that very sidewalk.

00:45:20.400 And he said,

00:45:21.140 this is a quote,

00:45:22.500 we do not live

00:45:23.320 in a country

00:45:23.900 where you can choose

00:45:25.220 your point of view.

00:45:28.160 And they held,

00:45:29.960 they acted like

00:45:30.920 the mere filing

00:45:31.900 of that lawsuit

00:45:32.620 was the victory.

00:45:35.080 And of course,

00:45:35.420 they had another thing

00:45:36.140 coming about a year

00:45:37.500 and a half later

00:45:38.160 when we won that case.

00:45:41.580 And

00:45:41.660 and interesting,

00:45:46.560 interestingly,

00:45:47.640 we're all looking

00:45:50.260 at the same videos.

00:45:51.680 The DOJ,

00:45:52.700 or in that case,

00:45:53.520 the Attorney General's office,

00:45:55.920 literally misrepresented facts

00:45:58.480 that were right there

00:45:59.560 on video.

00:46:00.660 It's like they live

00:46:01.720 in a different reality.

00:46:02.660 And and our trial judge

00:46:04.840 said at the end

00:46:05.880 of a long case,

00:46:06.920 she rendered

00:46:07.220 a hundred page opinion

00:46:08.620 saying your witnesses

00:46:11.140 aren't believable.

00:46:12.480 You're misrepresenting

00:46:13.660 what's going on here

00:46:14.800 and you're not going

00:46:15.340 to get your injunction.

00:46:16.300 But it took a lot

00:46:17.320 of work to do that.

00:46:18.860 The next one

00:46:19.920 after that

00:46:20.540 was the Hout case.

00:46:21.480 Of course,

00:46:21.680 you all know

00:46:22.060 what the Hout case is.

00:46:23.580 The the commonality

00:46:25.080 here is continued.

00:46:26.780 The the prosecution

00:46:28.380 as a face case

00:46:30.120 was an egregious

00:46:32.160 reach.

00:46:33.240 It was an egregious

00:46:34.160 abuse of the law

00:46:35.380 trying to make it

00:46:36.440 fit facts

00:46:37.200 that are not intended

00:46:38.080 to be included

00:46:39.580 in the face case.

00:46:41.020 The next one

00:46:41.780 is that fairly recently

00:46:42.900 we tried

00:46:43.380 the Lauren Handy case.

00:46:45.760 In that case,

00:46:47.220 again,

00:46:47.620 DOJ.

00:46:48.540 From this point forward,

00:46:49.360 it's all DOJ.

00:46:50.280 After after grief,

00:46:51.540 as soon as Dobbs

00:46:52.660 started looking

00:46:53.660 like it was going

00:46:54.260 to happen,

00:46:55.000 the DOJ exploded

00:46:55.960 and these are

00:46:56.480 all DOJ cases.

00:46:58.800 So Hout was DOJ. 0.97

00:47:00.380 Handy was DOJ also.

00:47:02.280 And Handy

00:47:02.820 and people

00:47:03.980 that were charged

00:47:04.660 with her

00:47:05.300 went into the clinic

00:47:06.700 and they sat down.

00:47:08.320 Interestingly enough,

00:47:10.700 two,

00:47:11.640 maybe,

00:47:12.420 allegedly

00:47:12.860 actually blocked

00:47:13.860 something.

00:47:14.880 But rather inarguably,

00:47:16.680 the other eight

00:47:17.320 did not.

00:47:18.900 Now,

00:47:19.440 a prosecutor

00:47:20.680 has a duty

00:47:21.820 to the prospective

00:47:23.180 defendants,

00:47:24.040 just as he has

00:47:24.660 a duty

00:47:25.160 to the community

00:47:27.280 at large,

00:47:28.080 not to over-prosecute.

00:47:30.920 He's got

00:47:31.420 prosecutorial discretion.

00:47:32.980 He's supposed to

00:47:34.420 employ it

00:47:35.420 temperately.

00:47:36.560 But we don't see that

00:47:37.780 in these cases.

00:47:39.520 Where he's got

00:47:40.400 two people

00:47:41.000 he may be able

00:47:41.820 to charge with face

00:47:42.720 and eight

00:47:43.240 that he really

00:47:43.760 ought to push off

00:47:44.620 to the state

00:47:45.160 and charge them

00:47:45.620 with trespass

00:47:46.300 if they want.

00:47:46.840 He doesn't do that.

00:47:48.280 Without the facts

00:47:49.080 to support the face

00:47:50.000 conviction itself,

00:47:51.440 what they do instead

00:47:52.420 is charge them

00:47:52.960 with conspiracy.

00:47:54.020 Anybody who was

00:47:54.680 anywhere around

00:47:56.160 the thing

00:47:56.560 gets charged

00:47:57.400 with conspiracy

00:47:58.180 and that's the same

00:47:59.400 as being charged

00:48:00.040 with face

00:48:00.460 even though there

00:48:01.020 was no conspiracy.

00:48:02.760 In that case,

00:48:03.600 there was no agreement.

00:48:05.360 The evidence

00:48:05.760 didn't support

00:48:06.460 anything but

00:48:07.180 an agreement

00:48:07.940 that whatever we do,

00:48:09.740 10 people,

00:48:10.600 we're all going

00:48:10.960 to do our own thing,

00:48:11.800 whatever you want

00:48:12.160 to do,

00:48:12.720 the only real agreement

00:48:13.920 was to be peaceful.

00:48:15.080 But it doesn't matter.

00:48:17.840 We're going

00:48:18.080 to rope them all in.

00:48:19.740 The next case

00:48:20.900 is a face case

00:48:22.200 we're actually

00:48:22.700 getting ready

00:48:23.140 to try starting

00:48:24.200 next Monday

00:48:25.220 in a couple of days.

00:48:26.040 That's in Tennessee.

00:48:27.200 Almost exactly

00:48:28.140 the same facts.

00:48:29.500 Two people

00:48:30.100 allegedly

00:48:30.740 did some blocking,

00:48:33.100 the others weren't.

00:48:34.100 And they didn't even

00:48:34.600 go into the clinic.

00:48:35.720 You know,

00:48:35.940 this is out

00:48:36.980 in public areas.

00:48:38.640 So that's a big deal.

00:48:41.080 It's a stretch

00:48:42.180 on the facts.

00:48:43.160 And how's the DOJ

00:48:44.440 handling it?

00:48:46.640 Conspiracy again.

00:48:48.660 We have an Ohio

00:48:49.860 civil case coming up.

00:48:52.020 It's just a civil case.

00:48:53.260 But the DOJ

00:48:54.040 is pushing it,

00:48:54.740 of course.

00:48:55.060 They've sent letters

00:48:55.680 to our clients

00:48:56.320 saying we're going

00:48:57.500 to sue you

00:48:57.880 for a face violation.

00:48:59.240 And what that means

00:48:59.960 since it's a civil case,

00:49:01.100 it could become

00:49:01.620 a criminal case later.

00:49:02.960 But in the civil realm,

00:49:05.240 what it means is

00:49:06.240 they're going to be

00:49:06.760 seeking an injunction

00:49:07.740 and they're going

00:49:08.620 to be seeking

00:49:09.300 a judgment

00:49:10.200 for a bunch of money.

00:49:12.300 Now,

00:49:12.920 the big picture here

00:49:15.140 is abuse

00:49:17.580 of the process.

00:49:19.420 Abuse of people 0.72

00:49:20.400 who are as entitled

00:49:21.300 to the protections

00:49:22.000 from government

00:49:23.400 as the people

00:49:24.600 the government

00:49:25.140 is fixated

00:49:26.640 on protecting

00:49:27.460 one-sidedly.

00:49:28.800 It is abuse.

00:49:30.380 It is egregious.

00:49:31.400 It is not good faith.

00:49:33.040 Now,

00:49:33.380 a few of these cases,

00:49:34.460 I've heard people say

00:49:35.380 in the Handy case

00:49:36.300 or maybe the Tennessee case,

00:49:37.640 well, good grief.

00:49:38.760 If people are going

00:49:39.720 into the clinics,

00:49:41.320 why are you defending them?

00:49:43.800 They go in there.

00:49:44.900 They know that

00:49:45.520 it's probably illegal.

00:49:46.880 They're going in there

00:49:47.660 to make trouble.

00:49:49.100 Aren't they willingly

00:49:49.900 breaking the law?

00:49:51.600 Aren't they making

00:49:52.400 pro-lifers look like radicals?

00:49:54.900 Shouldn't they rely

00:49:55.840 on lawful means?

00:49:58.380 The answer to that question

00:49:59.920 affects everyone

00:50:00.740 in this room.

00:50:02.280 And it's multi-parted.

00:50:03.680 I'm going to try

00:50:04.120 and go quickly.

00:50:04.820 First of all,

00:50:05.900 the people watching

00:50:06.900 a pregnant woman

00:50:07.580 walk into a clinic

00:50:08.540 are looking at

00:50:09.660 an actual baby,

00:50:10.980 not a hypothetical baby.

00:50:13.060 The defense of others' idea,

00:50:15.800 which is born in natural law,

00:50:18.160 is real.

00:50:19.000 It's compelling.

00:50:20.260 And it's what they act upon.

00:50:22.740 When you're watching

00:50:23.800 a real baby

00:50:24.660 about to be killed,

00:50:25.880 you don't go outside 0.98

00:50:26.880 and call your congressman

00:50:28.180 or write a letter

00:50:28.840 to the editor.

00:50:30.100 You act.

00:50:31.320 Now,

00:50:31.900 in most cases,

00:50:34.180 we confront a problem there.

00:50:35.400 It's a barrier

00:50:36.040 to using that defense.

00:50:37.420 And that is 1.00

00:50:37.900 that killing that baby 1.00

00:50:38.760 is legal. 1.00

00:50:40.000 If it's legal,

00:50:41.260 you don't really

00:50:42.000 get the defense

00:50:43.520 of others' argument.

00:50:45.420 And, you know,

00:50:46.440 there are ways

00:50:46.880 you might be able to,

00:50:47.760 but pretty much 0.99

00:50:48.340 it's a loser. 0.78

00:50:49.560 The second answer 0.99

00:50:50.600 to why we defend them,

00:50:51.640 though,

00:50:52.060 is that if the killing 0.98

00:50:53.720 of that baby

00:50:54.300 is actually illegal,

00:50:56.340 then the law provides

00:50:58.600 and your duty says

00:51:01.740 you intervene.

00:51:04.620 You intervene.

00:51:06.080 Where the evidence is

00:51:07.340 that babies are

00:51:08.340 not being killed legally,

00:51:09.860 but being killed illegally,

00:51:11.280 born alive 0.97

00:51:11.920 and left to die. 0.85

00:51:13.300 And the evidence

00:51:13.880 of that is very strong.

00:51:14.940 It was very strong

00:51:15.700 in the Handy case.

00:51:17.760 Face doesn't even apply.

00:51:19.340 There's no argument

00:51:20.380 that that is

00:51:21.760 reproductive health care.

00:51:24.220 Face defines

00:51:24.920 reproductive health services 0.62

00:51:26.020 as dealing with a pregnancy.

00:51:27.220 But a baby outside the womb

00:51:28.960 living at any stage

00:51:30.180 and even for 30 seconds

00:51:31.700 is not a pregnancy.

00:51:33.200 This is a human being

00:51:34.320 who has all the rights

00:51:35.640 to protection

00:51:36.280 that anyone in this room has.

00:51:38.440 So you can do your blocking.

00:51:40.500 You can do your trespassing.

00:51:42.480 You can chain yourself to doors.

00:51:44.120 That is not unlawful.

00:51:47.000 So in those situations,

00:51:49.160 the people that we would represent there

00:51:51.400 are not using unlawful means.

00:51:54.260 They are using lawful means.

00:51:57.220 But they are charged with a crime.

00:52:00.120 Third part of that answer

00:52:01.540 is that if only some people block,

00:52:04.240 but all are charged,

00:52:06.400 don't these people deserve defense?

00:52:10.460 Fourth answer to that,

00:52:11.980 no rule says that all pro-lifers

00:52:14.680 have to do things

00:52:15.720 exactly the same way.

00:52:18.120 People speak the language they heard.

00:52:22.520 People get into the pro-life business

00:52:24.220 because something affected them.

00:52:26.880 A sign of an aborted baby.

00:52:28.580 A picture of a non-aborted baby.

00:52:30.700 Some argument that somebody made.

00:52:32.240 A printed sign.

00:52:33.380 Whatever it is doesn't really matter.

00:52:34.840 But people will tend to go

00:52:36.020 into the pro-life movement

00:52:37.140 doing things in the way

00:52:39.320 that they got brought into by.

00:52:42.160 So that's pretty important.

00:52:44.680 And the variety of approaches

00:52:45.960 to the thing

00:52:46.720 really reflects the depth

00:52:48.900 and complexity

00:52:49.720 and fundamental nature

00:52:51.400 of the pro-life view.

00:52:55.300 When we come at it

00:52:56.700 from a hundred different directions,

00:52:58.480 it's harder for the other side

00:52:59.920 to just dismiss it

00:53:01.080 or ignore it

00:53:02.000 as the unilateral ravings

00:53:04.000 of kind of a one-sided group.

00:53:08.340 Fifth answer,

00:53:09.360 and there's only one more after this.

00:53:11.440 Defending people works.

00:53:13.960 When Father Wesselin

00:53:15.980 was first charged,

00:53:17.240 he was charged by the state

00:53:18.940 with trespass.

00:53:20.380 But the federal government

00:53:21.940 came down with all their power

00:53:24.120 and they took it away from the state

00:53:26.000 and they charged him

00:53:27.300 with his face sack.

00:53:29.060 Created a much bigger,

00:53:30.300 much more complex trial.

00:53:31.840 But we won it.

00:53:33.000 A year later,

00:53:34.820 Father Wesselin

00:53:35.740 went in to the same clinic

00:53:38.160 and did exactly the same thing.

00:53:40.780 He was one of these wonderful,

00:53:42.060 indefatigable guys

00:53:43.420 that was just going to do this.

00:53:45.180 He did the exact same thing.

00:53:47.820 The feds wouldn't touch it.

00:53:51.260 We went in and pled him guilty

00:53:52.820 to trespass

00:53:53.700 and a nice judge

00:53:54.720 fined him 25 bucks

00:53:55.820 and it was done.

00:53:57.860 Trying cases,

00:53:59.100 winning cases especially,

00:54:00.860 keeps the other side

00:54:01.940 a little more honest.

00:54:03.320 They don't want to waste

00:54:04.120 their resources.

00:54:05.520 They don't want to work hard.

00:54:06.580 They don't want to get embarrassed.

00:54:09.940 Finally,

00:54:11.240 and this applies,

00:54:12.740 kind of wraps up

00:54:13.460 the whole idea

00:54:14.300 that everybody in this room

00:54:16.400 ought to care about.

00:54:18.800 If we didn't defend

00:54:20.160 people out on the edges,

00:54:21.860 people I like to call

00:54:22.640 the rascals,

00:54:23.920 and if we didn't have

00:54:25.540 the victories,

00:54:27.340 the government

00:54:27.980 that spends all its time

00:54:29.180 coming after them

00:54:30.160 would be coming after you.

00:54:31.900 I'm not doing

00:54:35.060 anything illegal

00:54:35.880 so I have nothing

00:54:37.180 to worry about

00:54:38.100 is not

00:54:39.560 a realistic approach

00:54:41.380 in the face

00:54:42.780 of a lawless

00:54:43.880 and abusive

00:54:44.640 government.

00:54:45.940 This is why

00:54:47.240 we need

00:54:48.180 the Thomas More Society

00:54:49.480 and this is why

00:54:50.940 finally,

00:54:58.100 with Dobbs,

00:54:59.260 the federal underpinnings

00:55:00.600 for the FACE Act

00:55:01.560 itself

00:55:01.980 have gone away.

00:55:03.040 That is not a strained argument.

00:55:04.400 It's a decent argument

00:55:05.380 and we're taking that up.

00:55:07.260 So,

00:55:07.580 stay tuned on that one.

00:55:09.140 Thank you.

00:55:09.460 Thank you,

00:55:15.800 Martin.

00:55:16.140 Good stuff.

00:55:16.860 Good stuff.

00:55:17.420 Well delivered.

00:55:18.520 You can see why I'm

00:55:19.680 honored to work

00:55:20.920 alongside these people.

00:55:22.860 We've come to the end

00:55:23.700 of our time here.

00:55:24.540 I want to urge you

00:55:25.260 to go to our website,

00:55:26.620 www.thomasmoresociety.org.

00:55:29.960 More has one O

00:55:31.000 and it's .org,

00:55:31.920 not .com.

00:55:33.000 You can sign up

00:55:33.660 for our emails,

00:55:34.460 follow our work.

00:55:35.800 You can support us

00:55:36.640 by,

00:55:37.520 there's a tab

00:55:38.320 that will allow you

00:55:39.440 to donate

00:55:39.800 in a variety

00:55:40.720 of different ways.

00:55:41.880 You can support us

00:55:42.640 financially also.

00:55:44.180 You hear me say this

00:55:44.980 every year,

00:55:45.860 we're really proud

00:55:46.840 of all these victories,

00:55:48.440 proud of our lawsuits,

00:55:50.000 proud of our wins,

00:55:50.700 proud of our clients

00:55:51.440 that are out there

00:55:51.960 putting it on the line.

00:55:53.340 But we realize

00:55:54.140 that even our biggest

00:55:55.160 courtroom victories

00:55:56.180 are just minor skirmishes

00:55:57.400 in what is really

00:55:58.380 a much larger

00:55:59.060 spiritual battle.

00:55:59.940 So please support us

00:56:00.840 with your prayers.

00:56:01.500 Thank you.

00:56:05.780 I've known John Henry

00:56:06.840 for a long, long time.

00:56:08.160 He is one of the founders

00:56:09.420 and editors

00:56:10.340 at LifeSite News.

00:56:12.340 And so, John,

00:56:12.920 what we want to know

00:56:13.500 about,

00:56:14.480 the media is so slanted,

00:56:15.920 it's so corrupt.

00:56:16.760 I look at the headlines,

00:56:17.580 I see the AP,

00:56:18.820 the talking points

00:56:19.660 from the Associated Press.

00:56:20.760 If you guys don't know,

00:56:21.440 they actually published

00:56:22.100 a topical guide

00:56:23.100 instructing their reporters

00:56:25.940 not to use the phrase

00:56:27.880 pro-life.

00:56:28.960 You are to refer

00:56:30.360 to pro-lifers

00:56:31.300 as anti-abortion.

00:56:33.140 And so you can see

00:56:33.900 the articles.

00:56:34.740 Jeanne Mancini

00:56:35.320 was in an article

00:56:36.020 earlier today.

00:56:36.860 Anti-abortion,

00:56:37.600 Jeanne Mancini,

00:56:39.160 right?

00:56:39.980 They can't say

00:56:40.900 anything positive

00:56:41.880 about the pro-life movement

00:56:43.260 because that would

00:56:43.820 destroy their narrative.

00:56:45.880 So I want to ask

00:56:46.800 John Henry Weston,

00:56:48.220 what can we do?

00:56:50.440 What are you doing

00:56:51.480 to address this gaping

00:56:53.240 gap of ethics

00:56:55.020 in the media?

00:56:56.340 Thank you, Royce,

00:57:00.260 and thank you

00:57:00.760 to all of you

00:57:01.560 who have for so many years

00:57:03.480 already defended life

00:57:04.660 in America.

00:57:06.680 As your third Canadian

00:57:08.000 mentioned in like

00:57:08.920 the last five minutes,

00:57:10.220 I think this is really cool.

00:57:11.680 Great opportunity

00:57:12.380 to follow Abby Johnson.

00:57:13.640 Always a hard act

00:57:14.320 to follow,

00:57:14.700 but someone great

00:57:15.320 and inspirational

00:57:16.020 to follow.

00:57:17.720 See, Abby talked

00:57:18.420 about something

00:57:18.940 right off the bat

00:57:19.940 which is absolutely

00:57:21.520 central

00:57:22.560 to how to discern

00:57:24.960 what is proper

00:57:26.960 when it comes to media.

00:57:28.660 And it's not going

00:57:29.420 to be popular to say.

00:57:32.240 The answer is

00:57:33.360 Jesus Christ.

00:57:39.060 It is the only way.

00:57:40.340 You know,

00:57:40.860 in the pro-life movement

00:57:41.720 in Canada,

00:57:42.280 we tried.

00:57:43.380 We tried

00:57:44.340 because our pro-life march

00:57:46.400 started in 1997.

00:57:48.260 We tried

00:57:48.840 to do it

00:57:49.660 without Jesus.

00:57:50.320 We tried

00:57:51.960 to say

00:57:52.360 to those people

00:57:52.980 coming with posters

00:57:54.020 of Our Lady

00:57:55.280 or a statue

00:57:56.480 or a crucifix.

00:57:58.580 Don't do that.

00:57:59.760 Keep that away.

00:58:01.600 Take this pro-life sign 0.98

00:58:02.700 instead.

00:58:04.880 A lot of them

00:58:05.700 stayed home

00:58:06.120 because of that.

00:58:07.460 God bless them

00:58:07.960 because it taught us

00:58:08.560 a lesson.

00:58:10.280 Here in America,

00:58:11.740 where everything

00:58:12.220 was free,

00:58:13.300 everybody came

00:58:14.160 with everything.

00:58:15.560 There's a huge

00:58:16.300 statue being carried

00:58:18.660 by guys.

00:58:19.500 I don't know

00:58:19.820 how they do that

00:58:20.380 by the way

00:58:20.720 for the whole march

00:58:21.220 but it's amazing.

00:58:22.580 When I go to Italy

00:58:23.540 at the March for Life,

00:58:24.480 they do that too

00:58:25.180 but they dance

00:58:25.880 the whole way

00:58:26.480 and carry a big

00:58:27.460 statue of Our Lady.

00:58:28.420 Those guys are heroes.

00:58:30.640 But it is actually

00:58:32.560 the answer.

00:58:33.520 If you want to know

00:58:34.500 what we're doing

00:58:36.300 in the pro-life movement,

00:58:39.260 we're evangelizing.

00:58:41.800 That is what we're doing.

00:58:44.820 What did Bernard Nathanson,

00:58:46.460 what did Abby Johnson 1.00

00:58:47.580 come to

00:58:48.320 they came to faith?

00:58:51.980 They came because

00:58:53.580 of faith.

00:58:55.940 We can't save

00:58:57.700 people from

00:58:59.200 just abortion 0.64

00:59:00.020 and then still

00:59:03.040 they're lost

00:59:04.260 eternally. 0.98

00:59:05.700 That's ridiculous. 0.90

00:59:07.700 We're saving their lives 0.99

00:59:09.380 for eternal life.

00:59:11.400 So if you want

00:59:12.060 a good clue

00:59:12.760 as to how to find

00:59:13.960 a media organization

00:59:14.820 that you can trust,

00:59:16.380 trust Jesus Christ.

00:59:20.540 At LifeSite News,

00:59:21.960 our mission

00:59:22.500 is evangelization.

00:59:24.740 News is actually there

00:59:25.820 as a hook

00:59:27.120 to evangelize.

00:59:29.380 And when you start

00:59:30.740 with Jesus,

00:59:31.620 you bring the truth

00:59:33.120 because you can't

00:59:34.060 do anything else

00:59:34.540 because you offend

00:59:35.240 the truth himself.

00:59:36.940 and so that's

00:59:38.600 our mission.

00:59:40.100 And obviously

00:59:41.000 we go to defend

00:59:42.220 the greatest

00:59:42.920 attacks on truth

00:59:44.360 with a capital T,

00:59:45.200 the greatest

00:59:45.720 attacks on Jesus Christ.

00:59:47.620 And

00:59:47.880 what is a little

00:59:49.500 known,

00:59:50.120 perhaps,

00:59:51.500 vision

00:59:53.920 given to

00:59:54.760 three children

00:59:55.300 in Fatima

00:59:55.720 in 1917,

00:59:56.420 the mother

00:59:59.100 of God

00:59:59.360 from heaven

00:59:59.660 came to tell

01:00:00.440 these little

01:00:02.240 children

01:00:02.620 the greatest

01:00:03.860 or the final

01:00:04.940 battle between

01:00:05.560 our Lord

01:00:05.900 and the reign

01:00:06.200 of Satan

01:00:06.520 will be over

01:00:07.140 marriage and

01:00:08.320 the family.

01:00:09.780 The very issues

01:00:11.180 that you fight

01:00:11.960 every day

01:00:12.740 are the very

01:00:13.940 issues

01:00:14.580 that are

01:00:15.640 the decisive

01:00:17.120 final battle.

01:00:19.260 And that's

01:00:20.460 why

01:00:20.900 it's so

01:00:21.860 demonic.

01:00:23.720 You ever

01:00:24.040 wonder

01:00:24.320 why

01:00:25.040 this

01:00:26.060 insane

01:00:27.020 ferocity?

01:00:29.480 Why?

01:00:31.040 And you will

01:00:31.560 have seen

01:00:32.000 the

01:00:32.360 abortionists

01:00:34.240 or

01:00:35.440 sidewalk

01:00:37.480 counselors,

01:00:38.140 whatever they

01:00:38.440 are.

01:00:39.600 They're nearly

01:00:40.520 foaming at the

01:00:41.260 mouth.

01:00:42.200 They're saying

01:00:42.820 the most

01:00:43.220 obscene

01:00:43.700 things.

01:00:45.320 Why?

01:00:47.980 You've

01:00:48.560 watched this.

01:00:50.560 Whether they

01:00:51.400 know it or not,

01:00:52.140 as we already

01:00:52.600 heard up here,

01:00:53.040 it's not

01:00:54.520 about

01:00:55.220 knowing

01:00:56.000 that you're

01:00:57.000 working with

01:00:58.180 the evil

01:00:58.660 one.

01:00:59.480 He doesn't

01:01:00.060 care.

01:01:00.380 In fact,

01:01:00.620 he enjoys

01:01:01.160 it more

01:01:01.700 when he's

01:01:02.760 thought not

01:01:03.180 to exist.

01:01:05.200 This whole

01:01:06.080 battle

01:01:06.480 is about

01:01:07.680 one thing.

01:01:09.000 We need

01:01:09.780 to be

01:01:10.780 about

01:01:11.260 Jesus Christ,

01:01:12.220 about evangelization,

01:01:13.700 and that's

01:01:14.840 why

01:01:15.240 the most

01:01:16.440 powerful thing

01:01:17.340 in the pro-life

01:01:17.800 movement

01:01:18.180 works.

01:01:20.200 It's the

01:01:20.880 same thing

01:01:21.280 Jesus did.

01:01:23.260 Telling

01:01:23.820 stories.

01:01:26.760 The stories

01:01:27.960 and the

01:01:29.260 images.

01:01:30.920 You know

01:01:31.620 that the

01:01:32.360 church is

01:01:32.620 all about

01:01:32.920 images.

01:01:34.300 You know

01:01:34.660 that in

01:01:34.960 every church

01:01:35.520 there's a

01:01:35.900 crucifix,

01:01:36.800 the most

01:01:37.380 horrific

01:01:37.840 scene of 0.94

01:01:38.660 death you

01:01:38.980 can ever

01:01:39.220 see.

01:01:40.860 That's why

01:01:41.520 in the

01:01:41.680 pro-life

01:01:41.940 movement we

01:01:42.580 have the

01:01:43.420 signs that

01:01:44.520 have converted

01:01:45.080 so many

01:01:45.660 people.

01:01:45.960 They're able

01:01:46.180 to see

01:01:46.780 what it

01:01:48.460 is that

01:01:49.300 we're doing

01:01:49.820 a million

01:01:51.160 times a

01:01:52.500 year,

01:01:53.220 every year,

01:01:54.800 to children

01:01:55.740 in this

01:01:56.420 country

01:01:56.940 alone.

01:01:59.340 So media

01:02:00.480 is there

01:02:01.280 to serve

01:02:02.240 as a tool

01:02:03.620 for bringing

01:02:04.100 the truth.

01:02:05.320 The only

01:02:06.000 trustworthy

01:02:06.440 media

01:02:06.980 is the

01:02:08.880 media that

01:02:09.460 serves to

01:02:10.400 bring you

01:02:10.820 to the

01:02:11.240 ultimate

01:02:11.660 truth.

01:02:13.440 And

01:02:13.540 outside of

01:02:14.460 that there

01:02:16.080 will always

01:02:16.460 be lies. 0.73

01:02:18.220 We started

01:02:18.920 LifeSite News

01:02:19.400 in 1997.

01:02:21.560 The whole

01:02:22.140 reason why we

01:02:22.660 started is

01:02:23.120 because the

01:02:23.500 same year

01:02:23.820 we started

01:02:24.200 the March

01:02:24.600 for Life

01:02:24.960 in Canada,

01:02:25.580 a copycat

01:02:26.180 of what

01:02:26.620 you guys

01:02:26.920 are doing

01:02:27.160 right here.

01:02:29.440 And they

01:02:30.000 lie consistently

01:02:31.360 in our

01:02:31.760 media that

01:02:32.660 it didn't

01:02:32.940 happen.

01:02:34.040 That if it

01:02:34.620 did happen,

01:02:35.080 it was like

01:02:35.460 five people.

01:02:37.140 The news

01:02:37.900 cameras that

01:02:38.520 came,

01:02:39.280 they would

01:02:39.600 focus on

01:02:40.160 the corner

01:02:40.580 where there

01:02:41.020 is probably

01:02:41.640 five people

01:02:42.360 having a

01:02:42.960 smoke,

01:02:43.260 likely.

01:02:43.520 and not

01:02:44.840 behind them.

01:02:45.560 And they

01:02:45.780 literally do

01:02:46.440 this stuff

01:02:46.920 because that's

01:02:48.280 what they're

01:02:48.500 about.

01:02:49.540 We've

01:02:49.980 watched,

01:02:50.780 especially

01:02:51.360 over the

01:02:51.940 past three

01:02:52.460 or four

01:02:52.760 years,

01:02:53.840 the media

01:02:54.340 lies in

01:02:55.000 ways you

01:02:56.600 never thought

01:02:57.060 possible.

01:02:58.240 No,

01:02:58.860 they wouldn't.

01:02:59.480 They didn't.

01:03:00.480 They did.

01:03:01.720 They did with

01:03:02.620 the absolute

01:03:03.360 utter collusion

01:03:04.400 of the media

01:03:06.160 owners.

01:03:06.860 You've watched,

01:03:07.440 how many of you

01:03:07.900 have seen these

01:03:08.400 videos where

01:03:09.100 all the news

01:03:10.060 media are

01:03:10.720 parroting the

01:03:11.380 same line?

01:03:12.040 Have you

01:03:13.400 guys seen

01:03:13.680 that?

01:03:14.440 Hands up if

01:03:14.860 you're

01:03:14.940 not.

01:03:15.600 A lot of

01:03:16.040 you have

01:03:16.160 seen it.

01:03:16.320 If you

01:03:16.460 haven't seen

01:03:16.780 it yet,

01:03:17.400 boy,

01:03:17.760 oh boy.

01:03:19.180 Every news

01:03:20.020 anchor parroting

01:03:20.860 the same

01:03:21.220 line.

01:03:21.900 And the

01:03:22.340 line is a

01:03:23.620 lie.

01:03:25.700 Because they're

01:03:26.420 trying purposefully

01:03:27.840 to give you

01:03:28.760 misinformation,

01:03:29.960 disinformation.

01:03:31.440 Media is about

01:03:32.240 trust.

01:03:34.100 LifeSite News

01:03:34.540 has been there

01:03:34.980 now for 26

01:03:36.640 years,

01:03:37.600 trying to

01:03:38.500 provide the

01:03:39.080 truth,

01:03:39.400 especially to

01:03:40.980 those whom

01:03:41.460 we serve.

01:03:42.540 And that

01:03:42.780 is first

01:03:43.160 and foremost

01:03:43.720 those in

01:03:44.540 the movement

01:03:44.840 for life

01:03:45.360 and family.

01:03:47.280 For LifeSite

01:03:47.820 News,

01:03:48.160 I'm John

01:03:48.420 Henry Weston.

01:03:49.360 And may

01:03:49.560 God bless

01:03:49.900 you.

The John-Henry Westen Show - January 31, 2024

SPECIAL： Thomas More Society, John-Henry Westen On Winning For Life

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript