Monday, March 7, 2022

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY - FOR FREE ABORTIONS AND BILLIONS HANDED OUT TO ILLEGALS JUMPING THE UNDEFENDED BORDERS PREGNANT FOR 18 YEARS OF ANCHOR BABY WELFARE

 It is the handmaidens working for Planned Parenthood who have joked about selling aborted baby body parts.  And it was Kamala Harris, when she was A.G. of California, who viciously prosecuted the young man who exposed that scandal, after she had received a hefty donation from Planned Parenthood.

Every day up to 150 [illegal migrant] women wait here, bargaining for hourly pay that is often below minimum wage, according to data collected from the Workers Justice Project last year. Often these day laborers are undocumented [illegals] and in recent months, many come from Ecuador. Rosa migrated from Ecuador and eventually settled in New York city nine years ago. She still comes to La Parada at least five days a week to look for work:  [She said] “Now it is very, very difficult because there are a lot of people”

Handmaid's Tale? Leftist handmaidens destroyed the USA

By Diana Mary Sitek

Many rational people who attempted to read Margaret Atwood's dystopian The Handmaid's Tale (1985) found it a big yawn.  But the left loved it.  So Hulu (a Disney company partly owned by Comcast), naturally made a mini-series of it.

Now we have the left opining, on September 21, that people like Amy Barrett were the inspiration for that totalitarian nightmare.  "Amy Coney Barrett, a favorite to be President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is affiliated with a type of Christian religious group that served as inspiration for Margaret Atwood's dystopian novel, The Handmaid's Tale."

I suggest that the boot is on the other foot!  It has been the women of the left who are first and foremost the handmaidens responsible for the appalling state of the nation and its totalitarian, "woke" culture — and their narcissist soy boys like former President Obama, Trudeau of Canada, Newsom of California, et al.  Looked at in this light, Joe Biden is the perfect Democrat candidate!  As a white, ineffectual, imbecilic male, ready to drop off the perch, he is exactly what Democrat women love — and why they detest his opposite, Donald Trump.

Women now have enormous political power through sheer numbers.  Although there has been no female president as yet, women are heavily represented at all levels of the political, legal, bureaucratic, educational, health, H.R., and local county sectors.  Women are a determinative voting segment, and younger women have been educated to identify with the left.  Therefore, it is their policies, and their values alone, that have been enacted, including claiming the murder of their unborn children as their natural right.

It is the handmaiden founders of Black Lives Matter who have denigrated women's traditional role (part of the "oppressive patriarchy") and who have encouraged street violence.

It is the handmaidens working for Planned Parenthood who have joked about selling aborted baby body parts.  And it was Kamala Harris, when she was A.G. of California, who viciously prosecuted the young man who exposed that scandal, after she had received a hefty donation from Planned Parenthood.

So what area of the dystopian, censored "woke" society we now find ourselves in are women not responsible for?  The Deep State?  Oh, no!  We have the corruption of HRC — and scandal after scandal involving female politicians and officeholders, day after day.  The latest is handmaid Ilhan Omar's treacherous ballot-harvesting in Minneapolis. 

Professor Janice Fiamengo's YouTube "Fiamengo Files" (now very heavily censored) give witness to the diabolical hatred of men that characterizes these feminist handmaidens.  And we have Jane Fonda telling us why women are at the forefront of the unscientific climate change hoax, where men are accused of raping Gaia!  Nancy Pelosi, in an attempt to distract attention from her hairdo hissy fit and the left's mismanagement of forest areas, has told us Mother Nature is angry.  Nor can we overlook that handmaiden of Gaia, the squinty-eyed Greta Thunberg.  As for globalism, the U.N. says women are key to that supra-nationalist organization's sustainable development goals.  Translate: New World Order.

Teenage handmaidens are at the forefront of the LGBT+ gender revolution, as revealed by Abigail Shrier in her book Irreversible Damage:  The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.  The health industry is on board and immediately affirms the young handmaidens' self-diagnosis, frequently entailing drastic surgery and hormonal intervention.

One can only ask what else remains for these handmaidens to destroy.  Virtually nothing.  Traditional hearth and home demolished.  Constitutional law shredded.  Civil war lit.  Gender confusion.  A.I.-human interface planned.  They have, with the help of their male enablers and those who do not see themselves as the beneficiaries of dead, white males, chopped out, erased, expunged, and revoked the Western heritage, root and branch.  Yet, having accomplished all of this, they are unhappy.  It's not enough.  There are still those who dare to protest against them, like the illustrious signatories of the recent Philadelphia Statement, courteously requesting a return to freedom of speech in the cause of liberal democracy.  They will be canceled out because the Amazon handmaids have debauched the language as well, using the terminology of liberal democracy to mean its opposite (exactly as their buddies, the Chinese, do).

But there is hope.  We know from history that moral decay eventually leads to societal collapse — and the opportunity to rebuild anew.  I believe we may be witnessing not the beginning of a new nightmare, but the final death agonies of the feminist dystopia, paralleled in the fate of Joe Biden.

Intrinsic to the human psyche is a foundational desire to adore the Eternal Good — which many call "God."  When that is replaced by the lust for power, as Faust testified, hell enters.  In making that Faustian bargain, by exchanging womanly graces for vengeful power, the handmaids sowed the seeds of their own destruction.  That is the chaos we now behold. 

 

Kamala Harris -- Planned Parenthood's Choice

By Daniel John Sobieski

Kamala Harris has been nominated by the Democratic Party to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, and judging from presidential nominee Joe Biden’s physical and mental condition these days, that might not amount to a whole lot of heartbeats. Her ascension would bring to power someone who has made war on the unborn, someone who has already used that power to shred the Constitution’s guarantee of the freedom of the press and persecute an investigative reporter who exposed Planned Parenthood’s efforts to harvest and sell aborted fetal body parts.  

David Daleiden heads the Center for Medical Progress, the group that unveiled what really goes on behind the curtain at Planned Parenthood, exposing the ghoulishness of the organization that profits off the destruction of human life and detailing past and future atrocities perpetrated by that organization in a series of revealing and damning videos.

Daleiden’s pro-life investigative reporting did not sit well with then California Attorney General Kamala Harris, who made it her mission to cancel Daleiden and his group, raiding his house, seizing his videos, video equipment, and notes, all with the purpose of ending his livelihood, his career, and his freedom. She prosecuted Daleiden under an obscure, rarely used, and arguably unconstitutional state law. As LiveAction.org reports:

Planned Parenthood relied heavily on its political allies to suppress the First Amendment rights of pro-life investigators David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt after the pair uncovered the corporation’s illegal trafficking of aborted body parts. Former California General Kamala Harris and current California Attorney General Xavier Becerra both pursued charges against the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) journalists instead of prosecuting Planned Parenthood for its criminal activities.

The federal civil rights lawsuit Daleiden filed in response has exposed how far Planned Parenthood’s political contacts will go to defend the organization’s reputation.

A recent update from Daleiden revealed that Planned Parenthood, Harris, and Becerra have all responded to the lawsuit filed against them, adding that all parties named in the suit have admitted the only reason Daleiden is being prosecuted is because the content of what he has said is something Planned Parenthood considers objectionable. The footage from Daleiden’s undercover investigation showed Planned Parenthood staff members coldly discussing the harvesting of fetal organs and negotiating the price of these “specimens.”

The Harris-managed vendetta against Daleiden, including a raid reminiscent of the deep-state raids on the homes of Roger Stone and Paul Manafort, is detailed by Madeline Osburn over at the Federalist:

Sen. Kamala Harris accepted the Democratic nomination for vice president Wednesday night, exactly three weeks after journalist and pro-life activist David Daleiden appeared in a San Francisco Superior Court, once again fighting the criminal charges Harris brought against him at the behest of her political donors four years prior. As Harris joins a campaign fighting for the “soul of our nation,” Daleiden continues a years-long battle for countless unborn souls and the First Amendment, both of which Harris has a record of fighting against.

In March 2016, as the California attorney general, Harris met with six Planned Parenthood officials in her Los Angeles office. Email records between Harris’s office and Planned Parenthood officials show the two were corresponding on orchestrating public responses, filing police reports, and even drafting legislation targeting Daleiden for his undercover videos exposing the abortion giant’s illegal practices…

Two weeks following that Los Angeles meeting, on April 5, 2016, Harris ordered state law enforcement agents to raid Daleiden’s home, tasking them with seizing his camera equipment, documents, and unreleased video footage. Daleiden’s attorneys argued Harris’s search warrant should have never been issued according to California’s shield law, which explicitly protects citizen journalists’ unpublished materials…

How blatant was Harris’s targeting of Daleiden and her disregard for a journalist’s First Amendment rights? For starters, Daleiden is the first person to ever be prosecuted for undercover video reporting in California. Her own deputy prosecutor later admitted in court that Daleiden was targeted solely because of the content his videos...

The appalling transcript of one disturbing video provided by the Center for Medical Progress has made clear that the alleged noble crusade against unwanted children is a fraud, and that Planned Parenthood’s interest in abortion is a financial one -- that human life is just a commodity to be bought and sold on the open market.

The video shows Planned Parenthood director of medical services Deborah Nucatola negotiating with two actors posing as agents of a fetal tissue procurement company discussing the body parts of aborted babies as if she was a butcher at the local meat market, as Breitbart.com reports:

“We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part,” Nucatola coldly explains. “I’m gonna basically crush [the unborn child] below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact… And for that reason, most providers will do this case under ultrasound guidance, so they’ll know where they’re putting their forceps.”

Nucatola also goes into great detail to explain how Planned Parenthood is able to use its loose affiliates as a way to protect the parent company from potential legal fallout…

Nucatola explains to the undercover reporters that the butchered body parts (hearts, livers, “lower extremities -- probably for the muscle”) sell for $30 to $100  apiece.

Indeed, immature or improperly dismembered baby parts could dramatically impact Planned Parenthood’s and the abortion industry’s bottom line. The use of aborted fetuses and their tissue is justified by abortionists as the key to medical research, as was using embryos for stem cell research. Planned Parenthood’s operation strays perilously close to the territory of Dr. Joseph Mengele, the Nazi “doctor” who justified his ghastly practices in the name of research.

Planned Parenthood and its supporters got caught with their forceps down, so anything they can do to cloud the issue and cast doubt on the integrity of their accusers is in their interest. Planned Parenthood has already tried to discredit the videos, saying they were carefully edited and that the admissions of Planned Parenthood officials of conducting a for-profit baby body part flea market was taken out of context. It is hard to imagine in what “context” the discussion of the price of a fetal head versus the price of a new Lamborghini is okay. As LifeNews.com comments:

The video of the Houston Planned Parenthood makes it appear the Planned Parenthood abortion business may be selling the “fully intact” bodies of unborn babies purposefully born alive and left to die. The video shows the Director of Research for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, Melissa Farrell, advertising the Texas Planned Parenthood branch’s track record of fetal tissue sales, including its ability to deliver fully intact aborted babies…

Planned Parenthood could be breaking the federal law known as the Born Alive Infants Protection Act that requires abortion clinics, hospitals and other places that do abortions to provide appropriate medical care for a baby born alive after a failed abortion or purposefully birthed to “let die.” That would be one of the potential ways Planned Parenthood could produce a “fully intact” baby to sell to StemExpress for research. Most “crunchy” abortion methods would do damage to the baby’s body.

Kamala Harris decided that Daleiden must be punished for exposing the ghastly activities of her patron Planned Parenthood. A similar fate awaits the rest of us should she grab the reins of power. Tucker Carlson of Fox News has rightly called Kamala Harris a corrupt and dangerous fraud who sees laws and powers only as means to punish her enemies, pursue her agenda, and get elected:

Carlson, who called Biden's vice presidential pick the "most consequential" choice in U.S. history, disputed Sen. Kamala Harris's authenticity on her progressive positions, saying the "front-runner" only stands by issues she knows will get her ahead in the polls. He cited the California Democrat's low polling numbers at the time that she ended her own bid for the presidency and dropped out of the Democratic primary race.

"The wrap on Harris in exit polls is that she’s a fraud," Carlson said. "She doesn’t really believe in anything, she'll say whatever it takes. Of course, that is also Harris’s primary strength."

Carlson also brought up an incident in which anti-abortion activist David Daleiden filed a lawsuit against Harris, alleging she and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra conspired with Planned Parenthood to terminate an investigation he was conducting into the fetal-tissue business. Daleiden accused Harris and Becerra of violating his First Amendment rights and abusing the state's two-party recording law to silence "disfavored speech."

Kamala Harris, like Biden, supports Planned Parenthood’s crimes against the unborn and takes money and endorsements from the abortion industry. One remembers her bitter and vitriolic participation in the Supreme Court confirmation hearing for Justice Brett Kavanaugh, her resorting to lies, falsehoods, and innuendo in an attempt to get what she wants and to keep this pro-life Catholic off the Supreme Court.

Kamala Harris, who slept her way into political power riding former California General Assembly leader Willie Brown’s, er, coattails, is a political dominatrix willing to inflict supreme pain and damage to our Constitution, our civil liberties, and the unborn     

Daniel John Sobieski is a former editorial writer for Investor’s Business Daily and freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in Human EventsReason Magazine, and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.     

Image: Michael Steeben       

 

Biden Solicitor General Inadvertently Admitted to Supreme Court That an Unborn Baby is a Baby

By Terence P. Jeffrey | March 7, 2022 | 3:29pm EST

  
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

(CNSNews.com) - Elizabeth Prelogar, who serves as President Joe Biden’s solicitor general, inadvertently admitted in the Supreme Court’s oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization that an unborn baby is indeed a “baby.”

The case is reviewing the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that prohibits most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

It was argued before the Supreme Court on December 1 and has not been decided yet.

Prelogar participated in the oral arguments, representing the Biden Administration and presenting its argument against allowing states to prohibit abortions after 15 weeks.

During the oral arguments, Justice Clarence Thomas asked Prelogar to specifically state what “right” the administration was claiming was protected by the court’s opinion in Roe v.  Wade and it was now seeking to defend in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health.

In response, Prelogar referred to it as “the right of a woman to be able to control…whether to carry that baby to term.”

She did not call it a fetus or any other technical term. She called the unborn baby simply a “baby.”

“General, would you specifically tell me, specifically state what the right is?” Justice Thomas asked her. “Is it specifically abortion? Is it liberty? Is it autonomy? Is it privacy?”

“The right is grounded in the liberty component of the Fourteenth Amendment, Justice Thomas, but I think that it promotes interest in autonomy, bodily integrity, liberty, and equality,” Prelogar responded.

“And I do think that it is specifically the right to abortion here,” she continued, “the right of a woman to be able to control, without the state forcing her to continue a pregnancy, whether to carry that baby to term.”

Biden Solicitor General Inadvertently Admitted to Supreme Court That an Unborn Baby is a Baby

By Terence P. Jeffrey | March 7, 2022 | 3:29pm EST

  
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

(CNSNews.com) - Elizabeth Prelogar, who serves as President Joe Biden’s solicitor general, inadvertently admitted in the Supreme Court’s oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization that an unborn baby is indeed a “baby.”

The case is reviewing the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that prohibits most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

It was argued before the Supreme Court on December 1 and has not been decided yet.

Prelogar participated in the oral arguments, representing the Biden Administration and presenting its argument against allowing states to prohibit abortions after 15 weeks.

During the oral arguments, Justice Clarence Thomas asked Prelogar to specifically state what “right” the administration was claiming was protected by the court’s opinion in Roe v.  Wade and it was now seeking to defend in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health.

In response, Prelogar referred to it as “the right of a woman to be able to control…whether to carry that baby to term.”

She did not call it a fetus or any other technical term. She called the unborn baby simply a “baby.”

“General, would you specifically tell me, specifically state what the right is?” Justice Thomas asked her. “Is it specifically abortion? Is it liberty? Is it autonomy? Is it privacy?”

“The right is grounded in the liberty component of the Fourteenth Amendment, Justice Thomas, but I think that it promotes interest in autonomy, bodily integrity, liberty, and equality,” Prelogar responded.

“And I do think that it is specifically the right to abortion here,” she continued, “the right of a woman to be able to control, without the state forcing her to continue a pregnancy, whether to carry that baby to term.


Senate Sinks Abortion Rights Bill – Let The Spin Begin


The cleverly worded bill failed to fly in the Senate. Was it too extreme even for moderates?

  |   Opinion News Article


isten to this article:00 / 11:48

The Senate voted to kill the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021 Monday, Feb. 28. Don’t let the name fool you; it was just another attempt by progressive Democrats to codify a right to abort in federal law. With states passing new restrictions and a predominately conservative Supreme Court considering legal challenges that have pro-choice activists trembling, the so-called reproductive right is a hot issue. The bill may have flopped in the upper chamber, but some argue the loss can be used to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat come election time in November. Can Democrats scare enough voters to break the impending red wave? Let the spin begin.

Setting The Narrative

New banner Liberty Nation Analysis 1Some version of this bill has come before every Congress since 2013, but this most recent effort is special. Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) introduced the cleaver bit of legislation on July 6, 2021, and the House passed it 218-211 on September 24. While Democrats champion this as a backstop should Roe v. Wade be overturned, in reality, it does much more.

Under the WHPA, no state could pass a law that blocks abortion before the point of viability. That means no more so-called heartbeat bills. Even after the point of viability, abortions would be federally protected so long as the “treating health care provider,” who under this law doesn’t necessarily have to be a doctor, believes in “good-faith medical judgment” that continuing the pregnancy could “pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.” Such open-ended language could be argued to allow late-term abortions in any pregnancy, as there are always risks.

Furthermore, no law could require any medical tests or even an in-person consult before a pregnant woman could be prescribed – over the phone – medication to abort. Parental notice and consent for minors also wouldn’t be allowed. Even a regulation that has a “reasonable likelihood” of deterring some patients indirectly would be prohibited, and defending such a law would require “clear and convincing evidence” that it “significantly advances the safety of abortion services” in a way that can’t be achieved through less restrictive ways.

As if that weren’t radical enough, the bill also explicitly states that it applies to any state or federal law “whether adopted before or after the date of enactment of this Act.” Taken literally, this would undo even the regulations already in place. Furthermore, since the WHPA also empowers both the individual and the Department of Justice to sue any state over such a law, an argument could be made for suits against any state that has previously passed any restriction that would become prohibited, regardless of how constitutional they might have been before.

Spin That Yarn

“The American people deserve to see that while Democrats are fighting to protect their constitutional rights, Republicans are hoping the Supreme Court rolls back Roe and are actively blocking Congress from acting to protect reproductive rights,” declared Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) before the vote. That’s a pretty tale for the left – but it falls just a little short of the truth.

With exactly half of the Senate occupied by Democrats or Independents who are Democrats in all but name, Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote gives her party a technical majority in the upper chamber – which means a trifecta of power over the federal government. Dems love to point to party-line votes and proclaim that the GOP is standing firmly in the way of progress. If only it weren’t for that dang old filibuster. But in truth, Democrats could eliminate that procedural hurdle entirely if they only held a true majority. Luckily for the Republic, they don’t. All 50 Republicans and at least two of the Democrats – Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema most often, though others occasionally join in – hold a slim majority against eliminating the filibuster.

In this vote, however, not even that much-ballyhooed Senate rule is to blame. In the 46-48 vote, Sen. Manchin sided with the GOP, as was expected. Still, even had he stood with his own party members, the vote would have failed 47-48. Bob Casey (D-PA) was the only other Democrat who didn’t co-sign the bill. While he did vote to open discussion, there’s no guarantee he would have endorsed the finished product. Even had all 48 Democrat co-sponsors been present and voted for it, that’s still two shy of a 50/50 split that could be weighted their way by the VP if it weren’t for the filibuster. Even the pro-abortion Republicans Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska voted against beginning debate – and they followed up by introducing a bill of their own to codify Roe v. Wade, if not in such a broad manner as the WHPA.  This bill is simply too extreme for moderate Democrats and pro-abortion Republicans to accept – and it likely only received a House vote in reaction to the Texas heartbeat bill banning abortions after six weeks.

GettyImages-1235693345-pro abortion protest

(Photo by Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Rally Around Abortion?

The vote represents yet another legislative loss for the Democrats. However, with the right spin, it also presents an opportunity for fearmongering to drive liberal voters otherwise disinterested and disheartened by the party’s lackluster performance to show up on election day. “It’s laying the groundwork for a very powerful contrast,” explained Democratic pollster Celinda Lake. “One of the biggest problems we have is convincing voters that any rights they have would ever be taken away, or that we would ever backtrack.” But this, along with the Supreme Court deliberations, can easily be presented as a crisis.

“We’re going to hold accountable every senator who votes against this bill,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) warned earlier. “Make no mistake, reproductive freedoms will be on the ballot this November.” Will Democrats really campaign on their own failures? Don’t doubt it for a minute. The real question is: How many useful idiots can they fool?

~ Read more from James Fite.


Joe Biden Delivers Flood of Cheap Migrant Labor to New York

A woman walks past a mural painted by Brazilian street artist Eduardo Kobra is seen on October 29, 2018 in New York City. - The Statue of Liberty, an icon of freedom and the United States, was a welcoming sight to immigrants arriving from abroad. (Photo by Angela Weiss / …
ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty
11:34

President Joe Biden’s deputies have delivered so many illegal migrants into New York that some of the female migrants cannot find work to pay their smuggling debts, according to claims by advocates for migrants.

“This intersection in Williamsburg, New York City, known as LaParada, or the stop, is a place where [illegal migrant Ecuadorian] women find a job for the day, primarily doing domestic work,” NBCNews.com reported on February 28. The report continues:

Every day up to 150 [illegal migrant] women wait here, bargaining for hourly pay that is often below minimum wage, according to data collected from the Workers Justice Project last year. Often these day laborers are undocumented [illegals] and in recent months, many come from Ecuador. Rosa migrated from Ecuador and eventually settled in New York city nine years ago. She still comes to La Parada at least five days a week to look for work:  [She said] “Now it is very, very difficult because there are a lot of people”

With more women, looking for work there’s more competition. Desperate to find a job and with little to no English, many new arrivals don’t negotiate their rate … [NBC asked] So you were here for a month before you could get a first job? [A migrant answered] Yes, one month.

The inflow is illegal because long-standing laws passed by Congress generally bar the admission of foreign workers into Americans’ labor market.

But Biden’s deputies — chiefly, the pro-migration border chief, Alejandro Mayorkas — helps tens of thousands of migrants from the country of Ecuador in South America walk through the U.S. border. Roughly 500,000 Ecuadorians walked through the southern border between 2000 and 2017, and another 97,000 Ecuadorians were recorded in 2021 while trying to cross the border.

“I left my country because of the economic situation that all of us Ecuadorians are living,” a recently released migrant told NBC.

“I’ve been here almost 34 years and I’ve never seen the wave of Ecuadorians coming in the short time,” said Walter Sinche, the executive director of the Alianza Ecuatoriana Internacional, or the Ecuadorian International Alliance. “I knew a family, for example, they came with five kids. Not only undocumented but also people that come with visa, they overstay, so that’s also a large number,” he told Breitbart News on March 2.

“Most of the ‘[female migrants arrive] with some kind of relatives, some on their own with no relatives,” said Sinche.

The female migrants are being exploited because employers pay them less than the minimum wage of $15 per hour, Sinche said  “It’s a new wave of new migrants coming to the U.S. and that’s why they [employers] take advantage,” he told Breitbart News. He continued:

The minimum wage in New York, it’s $15 an hour. But since they are new in the country, the people sometimes get paid that amount and sometimes they pay them less. I know people, they get paid like $7, $8 an hour … Like I said, a new generation.

“I earned very little and it was not enough,” one of the migrant women told NBC.

State governments and federal agencies do little about wage theft against illegal migrants. The lax enforcement of labor law hels to push down wage levels for Americans. For example, NYSFocus.com reported in June 2021:

“Employers were using the pandemic as an excuse to not pay workers,” said Glendy Tsitouras, an organizer with the Workers Justice Project, a Brooklyn-based worker center that serves day laborers and domestic workers. “They would tell workers that something happened and that they will pay next week—but that never happened.”
In April of 2020 alone, Tsitouras said, her organization was flooded with between 30 and 35 cases. Pre-pandemic, they typically received around 15 cases a month.

The workplace migrant abuse tends to come from Asian and Middle Eastern immigrants, Sinche said. There are “not many” complaints about Americans  “like, for example, [Americans] from Ireland, Italians, Germans,” he said, adding:

Because they’re more conscious about their past, their history and they know also their grandma, their grandparents, came to the U.S. almost the same situation and [so] they are less abusive with new migrants on a high percentage. I’m talking about new communities, the Asians, they came a little later, and they start purchasing homes, for example, in the Corona area …  They [are] not bueno, can be really bad … mainly Chinese … I’m just talking about the facts of what people have been telling me … They take advantage of new migrants and also basically if you’re trying to claim [legal protections] they say they will call immigration.

New York City’s government encourages and funds illegal migration into the city, despite the damage to Americans’ wages and housing costs. In September 2021, for example, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) declared:

The last year and a half … have shown how vital our [illegal] immigrants have been to keeping our economy going during the time of crisis … We’re short of workers from one end of America to the other — one of the reasons? The Trump administration dramatically cut back on immigrants in this country. We need them. We need them in our labor force. We need them to continue American vitality. We need them because they’re part of the American dream.

“The main driver of both new business formation and population growth in New York has historically been international immigration,” says a September 2020 Axios.com article. If international “immigration remains suppressed, New York will suffer,” says the article, which was titled “The math of New York City’s recovery.”

Migrants in New York need jobs to live in the expensive city, but they also need money to pay off their debts of about $15,000 to $20,000 per person.

They also need cash to re-hire the coyotes so they illegally deliver the migrants’ children to them via the federal government’s Unaccompanied Alien Children child-delivery program.

If the migrants cannot get jobs, they cannot pay their smuggling debts, Sinche said.  “All over, coyotes are lending money [to migrants] but they have to sign a document saying ‘If you’re not paying [the debt], I’ll take your land or house or any other property,'” he said. When the debt is not paid, “most of the time, they ended up taking the properties … That’s a corrupt system that’s happening in Ecuador.”

If the women cannot get jobs, they also cannot save enough money to pay coyotes to bring their children to U.S. border officials, Sinche said.

The rise in Ecuadorian migration during 2021 is partly caused by migrants hiring coyotes to deliver their children to the border, William Murrillo told BorderReport.com in August 2021. “It’s parents who haven’t seen their children in many years and send for them,” said Murillo, a former government official in Ecuador who now runs a binational legal firm for Ecuadorians.

Murillo’s “personal experience as an undocumented migrant marked his life and he decided to serve our community of Ecuadorians in the world,” according to the firm’s website.

The migrants try to save wages for debt payments by crowding into apartments, Sinche said. “They have to struggle — they cannot afford to spend too much money … because they want to save,” he said.

“For example, a two-bedroom apartment, it’s supposed to be for a family, maybe two [people per bedroom. But now] sometimes, it is five to six or seven in a two-bedroom apartment,” he said. Rents are “way too crazy, especially here in the area of Queens Corona. A single studio will go for $1,500 to $1,600, and a two-bedroom, sometimes it goes to 2000 to $2,400,” which is up about $150 since rents declined during the coronavirus crash, he said.

City officials do not stop landlords from subdividing apartments to extract more rent, he said. In an August rainstorm, 11 migrants drowned in their basement apartments.

Migrant men are in a better position because they can take construction jobs, Sinche added. “They do pretty good,” said Sinche, who offers government-designed safety training to the illegal migrants.

Without domestic work, some women are trying to get construction jobs, he said.

What I find out was that women are taking the men’s positions, even construction. I just got a conversation yesterday with a couple of women that they do concrete work, they do carpentry works. I know one woman is doing electrical work. So since I’m an electrician for many years, I never seen so many Hispanics on the electrical trade, for example. I mean it’s good for them, but they do because there’s no other options to pick up my new skills.

The migrants’ money generates profits for many businesses in New York, according to Sinche: “They also pay for taxes, regardless of immigration status … they make money circulate in society … They have to eat, they have to wear clothes, they have to take transportation, [when] they get sick, they take medication.”

“They make money circulate in society,” he said.

But the huge inflow of migrants cuts Americans’ wages and raises their housing costs. A 2021 report by New York City’s government says a couple with two children would need to earn at least $154,000 to count as middle-income in the city.

Since at least 1990, the D.C. establishment has used a wide variety of excuses and explanations to justify its policy of extracting tens of millions of immigrants and visa workers from poor countries to serve as workers, consumers, and renters in the U.S. economy.

The economic strategy of extraction migration has no stopping point, and it is harmful to ordinary Americans because it cuts their career opportunities and their wages while also raising their housing costs.

Extraction migration also curbs Americans’ productivity, shrinks their political clout, and widens the regional wealth gaps between the Democrats’ coastal states and the Republicans’ heartland states. The economic strategy also kills many migrantsseparates families, and damages the economies of the home countries.

An economy built on extraction migration also radicalizes Americans’ democratic, compromise-promoting civic culture and allows wealthy elites to ignore despairing Americans at the bottom of society.

The wealth-shifting extraction migration policy is very unpopular, according to a wide variety of polls. The polls show deep and broad public opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates.

The opposition is growinganti-establishmentmultiracialcross-sexnon-racistclass-basedbipartisanrationalpersistent, and recognizes the solidarity that Americans owe to one another.

 

NY School District Slashes Budget by $6M After $4.5M Cost to Accommodate Influx of Migrants

PENNY STARR


One sector of the economy that is being hit by the continuous flow of migrants into the United States, including thousands of illegal aliens, is public schools, which accept all students regardless of immigration status as dictated by law.

This puts pressure on not only school budgets and how they cover staffing, student resources, and even charge taxpayers, including a school in Long Island, New York. Officials with the Wyandanch School District announced it would trim its budget by almost $6 million.

The local ABC affiliate reported on the Wednesday announcement of the revised budget plan:

The budget includes reductions in athletics and sports programs, the elimination of a science teacher, ELA teacher, guidance counselor, classroom monitors and STEM personnel. It calls for the outsourcing of transportation and security in order to cut costs.

Last week voters in Wyandanch rejected the [first] school budget by 332-149. It called for a 40.93 percent property tax increase and would have reduced school bus service in the 2019-2020 school year. It was the only school budget rejected on Long Island. State auditors have warned the school district needs to cut costs and that it’s spending millions more than it has.

But the massive cost of unlimited immigration is buried in the story:

[Superintendent Mary] Jones said the cause of the budget issues includes paying for an influx of hundreds of immigrant children from the border, which cost the district about $4.5 million over the past few years. Jones said the district had to purchase six portable classrooms and had to rent space in the nearby Half Hollow Hills school district. She said costs also included extra materials, transportation and after-school academic support for the new students.

“Monies we had in our reserves we had to use to meet the spacing needs,” Jones said. “We were under the impression that because we filed our papers to the state, the state would reimburse us for those dollars that we had spent, but that is not the case.”

“These are extremely huge decisions that have to be made, but if we are to present a balanced budget to the public after review of the first budget this is what it entails,” Jones said.

Follow Penny Starr on Twitter or send news tips to pstarr@breitbart.com.


Progressives Demand More Giveaways for Illegal Immigrants

Biden’s open-border policies expand the pool of entitled illegals.

Joseph Klein

Progressive advocates for illegal immigrants are pressing for

an expansion of New York State’s $2.1 billion giveaway of

subsidies to illegal immigrants who are otherwise ineligible for

government relief. Passed last April as part of the New York

State budget, the “Excluded Worker Fund” has provided one-

time payments as high as $15,600 to illegal immigrants who

have been able to document that they lost work during the

COVID-19 pandemic. Other illegal immigrants without this

level of documentation were still able to receive payments of

$3,200 to match the amount of COVID-19 related assistance

that many American citizens and other legal residents have

received from the federal government.

The New York Times described the Excluded Worker Fund as “by far the biggest of its kind in the country and a sign of the state’s shift toward policies championed by progressive Democrats.” But evidently, the fund is not big enough as far as the progressive advocates for illegal immigrants are concerned.

The Excluded Worker Fund is already running out of money. “To date, the state has distributed just over two-thirds of the fund, to about 128,000 people, a fraction of the nearly 351,000 claims that were received,” the New York Times reported on October 19th.

What else would you expect from yet another poorly conceived progressive Democrat program? Demand for the illegal immigrant subsidies has outstripped the money available to pay for them. The number of claimants to date has exceeded by over 20 percent the number of illegal immigrants that the Director of Immigration Research at a liberal think tank estimated last May would benefit from the program. 

The situation will only get worse as the Biden administration continues to admit hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants into the country and releases many of them, flying some individuals to New York.

The answer for the progressives is to throw more good money after bad. A progressive coalition calling itself Fund Excluded Workers tweeted on October 20th: "We call on @GovKathyHochul and the state legislature to add $3 billion to the Excluded Workers Fund in next year's budget. The Governor and the State Legislature must finish the job and FULLY #FundExcludedWorkers.”

The progressive Democrat base in New York will almost certainly look at how hard Governor Kathy Hochul fights for this additional money in deciding whether to support her in next year’s gubernatorial election or back a more progressive candidate instead.

Bianca Guerrero, the campaign coordinator of the Fund Excluded Workers coalition, declared that “It’s not enough to finish the job that the last governor started; we need her to make sure that it meets the actual demand.”

Meeting the “actual demand” from a rapidly increasing number of illegal immigrants residing in New York will be an endless exercise, at least for as long as the Biden administration’s open border and catch and release policies remain in place.

“At least 160,000 illegal immigrants have been released into the U.S., often with little to no supervision, by the Biden administration since March – including a broad use of limited parole authorities to make more than 30,000 eligible for work permits since August,” Fox News reported, based on  Border Patrol documents Fox News obtained.

The Biden administration is adding to the number of illegal immigrants in New York by flying unaccompanied illegal minors to New York State. “Planeloads of underage migrants are being flown secretly into suburban New York in an effort by President Biden’s administration to quietly resettle them across the region,” the New York Post reported on October 18th.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed the New York Post report, making light of it instead of explaining the secrecy surrounding the flights. According to Psaki, the underage illegal immigrants flown into New York were “en route to their final destination to be reunified with their parents or vetted sponsor.”

It’s not hard to imagine the illegal immigrant advocates demanding more New York State money to subsidize these newly arrived minors and their parents or sponsors.

The massive “Building Back Better” tax and spend bill that President Biden and his Democrat allies in Congress are trying to foist on the American people demonstrates the progressive left’s pro-illegal immigration priorities. They are seeking to extend the existing Child Tax Credit to illegal immigrant children. The financial impact would be massive.

Nationwide, it has been estimated that more than 1 million illegal immigrant children and their families would benefit from such an extension. The financial impact of including illegal immigrant children in the Child Tax Credit expansion would exceed an estimated $3 billion. The financial impact in New York alone is estimated to exceed $221 million.

The Democrats, led by their left-wing progressive base, have become the open border handout party for illegal immigrants.

Senate Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said Monday amnesty and migrants are needed to prevent labor shortages.

Schumer made his claim as many employers say they must raise wages for Americans in a national labor shortage.

Since early 2020, many Americans quit their jobs in low-wage sectors, such as bars, restaurants, retail stores and for home-healthcare contractors. That resulting labor shortage has boosted wages for millions of blue-collar Americans.

Schumer spoke the morning after the Senate’s debate referee, the Parliamentarian, blocked the Democrats from putting an amnesty for illegal migrants in a special funding bill. The bill can pass with only 51 votes instead of the usual 60 votes in the Senate.

Schumer said:

The last year and a half … have shown how vital our [illegal] immigrants have been to keeping our economy going during the time of crisis … We’re short of workers from one end of America to the other — one of the reasons? The Trump administration dramatically cut back on immigrants in this country. We need them. We need them in our labor force. We need them to continue American vitality. We need them because they’re part of the American dream.

Schumer sought to shame Americans into supporting the mass migration policies which allow New York’s employers and landlords to become reliant on plentiful and cheap legal immigrants and illegal migrants:

It’s estimated in my city [New York] by some that one-third of the healthcare workers at the height of COVID who risked their lives for us were immigrants. Having a strong law that helps our immigrants is vital. The American people understand that fixing our broken immigration system is a moral imperative [emphasis added] and an economic imperative.

Immigration reform has been one of the most important causes of my time in the Senate, and I will not stop fighting to achieve it.

Schumer blamed President Donald Trump’s 2020 curbs on migration for the labor shortage. But that admission indirectly credits Trump’s 2020 policy with helping to raise 2021 wages for millions of Americans.

 

Schumer’s claim the economy needs migrants is in direct contradiction to President Joe Biden’s inconsistent support for wage raises amid labor scarcity, technically known as “a tight labor market.”

Biden, age 78, explained his support for the long-standing and very popular goal of a tight labor market in a May 28 speech:

Rising wages aren’t a bug; they’re a feature.  We want to get — we want to get something economists call “full employment.”  Instead of workers competing with each other for jobs that are scarce, we want employees to compete with each other to attract wrk.  We want the — the companies to compete to attract workers.

[…]

Well, wait until you see what happens when employers have to compete for workers.  Companies like McDonald’s, Home Depot, Bank of America, and others — what do they have to do?  They have to raise wages to attract workers.  That’s the way it’s supposed to be.

Many economists say labor shortages make the economy more efficient and productive per person.

“The labor scarcity we’re experiencing is real … [but] this is an opportunity, not a crisis,” David Autor, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said in a September 4 op-ed for Schumer’s home-town newspaper, the New York Times. He continued:

Couldn’t raising wages spur employers to automate many low-paid service jobs? Yes — but that’s not bad. There’s no future in working the fry station at White Castle. We should welcome the robot that’s now doing that job at some locations. Automating bad jobs has positive consequences for productivity. When employers pay more for human labor, they have an incentive to use it more productively … And one way to use people more productively is to train them. This may be one reason that employers provide more training opportunities in a tightening labor market — something happening now.

However, lobbyists have persuaded Biden to back the amnesties that would deliver roughly six million workers — at least — into many of the jobs needed by Americans.

To a large extent, Biden has been pushed to back amnesties — and to forget about tight labor markets — because of face-to-face pressure by lobbyists from Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us advocacy group of West Coast investors.

On September 17, Biden’s economic advisors downplayed the wage damage to Americans as they issued a pro-amnesty memo. Notably, the memo did not endorse lobbyists’ claims that an amnesty would raise wages for Americans, and promised that wage losses would disappear “in the longer run.”

 

People attend a protest supporting DACA, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, at Foley Square in New York, on August 17, 2021. (KENA BETANCUR/AFP via Getty Images)

The economic damage caused by migration to Americans was made clear September 1, when several Americans and illegal immigrant were drowned in the their cheap basement apartments in New York. The apartments were all they could afford in a city where migration has swelled real-estate values.

The New York Times posted an article on September 2, which was discreetly  silent about the federal government’s role in the drowning of migrants — and of poor Americans — in New York’s cheap basements:

In one of the most expensive housing markets in the world, they have offered low-income New Yorkers, including many working-class families who work in restaurants and hotels, affordable places to live. The basement apartments also provide some extra income for small landlords, many of whom are also immigrants.

[…]

Deborah Torres, who lives on the first floor of a building in Woodside, Queens, said she heard desperate pleas from the basement apartment of three members of a family, including a toddler, as floodwaters rushed in. A powerful cascade of water prevented anyone from getting into the apartment to help — or anyone from getting out. The family did not survive.

Many polls show that labor migration is deeply unpopular because it damages ordinary Americans’ career opportunities, cuts their wages, and raises their rents. Migration also curbs their productivity, shrinks their political clout, widens regional wealth gaps, and wrecks their democratic, compromise-promoting civic culture.

For many years, a wide variety of pollsters have shown deep and broad opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates. This pocketbook opposition is multiracialcross-sexnon-racistclass-basedbipartisan,  rationalpersistent, and recognizes the solidarity Americans owe to each other.

However, donor-funded GOP leaders have downplayed the pocketbook impact of migration on Americans’ communities. Instead, they try to steer voters’ concerns towards subsidiary non-economic issues, such as migrant crime, the border wall, border chaos, and drug smuggling.

Democrats Want $5.5 Billion Bailout of New York Citys Illegal Population

NEIL MUNRO

The coronavirus crash has completely impoverished New York City’s huge illegal-migrant population, so it needs a bailout from billionaires, says a far left group of open border activists.

The advocacy group, Make the Road NY, wants to raise $5.5 billion from 120 New York billionaires to provide roughly $750 per week in aid for up to 1.2 million illegal migrants and their dependents. Numerous Democratic legislators back the campaign.

The New York Times gave the draft legislation a boost on November 15, with an excellent video report that showcased some of the unemployed, illegal migrants who were trying to earn some cash as street vendors:

On one corner, Cristina Sanchez stood forlornly at a produce stand. She had not sold a single thing. During the pandemic she had lost her job, and then her rented room, triggering a frantic hustle to survive: First she sold produce, then tacos, then produce again …

“This has affected my children [in Mexico] a lot,” Cristina said, as she started to cry. “I try to tell them that because there’s no steady work, whatever I make is only enough for me to survive for the day.”

The New York Times showcased one of the group’s members, “Gerardo,” a Mexican who arrived in 2006:

He decided to sell tacos de alambre — made with steak, chiles, bacon and cheese — on the street. The owner of a local deli let him use an enclosed sidewalk stand at night, free of charge. During the day it sells smoothies.

Gerardo’s sales have not been brisk. His tacos cost two for $5. He needs to sell at least 130 each day, a target he often misses by half.

Many excluded workers have become street vendors in the past few months as a new source of income.

Our member Gerardo, also featured, has fought to #FundExcludedWorkers after losing his job and having to sell his car to make ends meet.https://t.co/Z9AwjTqiIH

— Make the Road NY (@MaketheRoadNY) November 16, 2020

The group also wants the state legislature to approve more licenses for street vendors — even though the extra supply of vendors would reduce income for the native-born and immigrant who operate the existing stands.

The Make the Road group said its surveys showed that:

92% of respondents reported that either they or another earner in their household has lost their job or income as a result of the crisis.

84% of respondents are now themselves unemployed, with 88% of them reporting job loss due to COVID-19.

Only 5% of respondents received unemployment benefits in the last month.

90% of household cleaners had lost their jobs. Those that were working had fewer clients than usual and had lost income.

The group’s survey says that 28 percent of renters in New York pay more than 50 percent of their wages on housing in the city’s migrant-crowded neighborhoods.

The scale of the imported poverty is huge but unclear.

Make the Road claims 1.2 million people “who haven’t received any aid,” while the New York Times says the city includes roughly half a million illegals.

The leaders in New York City choose to build their service and real-estate economies on cheap imported labor, so denying wages, jobs, and home to the many Americans who did live – or want to live — in the city.

Now the coronavirus crash is threatening the city’s economy by pushing out impoverished migrants, and their departure is pressuring employers to raise wages high enough to attract Americans to jobs in New York.

New York’s problem with impoverished illegal migrants is mirrored in Boston, Massachusetts, and in Los Angeles.

Mass immigration shifts investment, jobs & wealth from the central states to the coastal states.
NY shows how Trump partly reversed the wealth transfer by curbing migration.
Yet GOP pols keep voting for immigration that makes their states poorer. #H1B https://t.co/NsKy7qY76V

— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) September 19, 2020 

 

 Democrats: $625B Tax Cut for Wealthy Elite ‘Essential’ Ahead of Midterms

 

JOHN BINDER

 

Democrats say cutting hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes for mostly wealthy income-earners in coastal states is “essential” to getting reelected in this year’s midterm elections.

In November, House Democrats passed President Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better Act” which includes billions in tax breaks to the wealthiest residents of blue states. Specifically, the plan would give a tax cut to about 67 percent of the nation’s richest Americans — those earning more than $885,000 every year — costing taxpayers about $625 billion.

Under Biden’s plan, those in the top one percent would receive an average tax cut of more than $16,000 this year. The tax cuts for the wealthy would be a result of the plan’s increasing the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction cap.

Ahead of the midterm elections in November, House Democrats are warning their rich donors that they must get out and vote for them to secure the massive tax cut. Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY) called the tax cuts for the rich “essential” in an interview with Bloomberg News.

 

Chart via Bloomberg News

“We need to get that done. It’s not the only thing, but it’s a big thing,” Maloney said, who represents one of New York’s wealthiest areas — Westchester County. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) called the tax cut “really important” for her constituency.

“If you want your state and local deductions back, you have to vote for Democrats. Republicans screwed you last time, and they’ll do it again,” Maloney said.

At the same time, a number of Democrats are blasting the effort, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME).

 

Sanders has said:

At a time of massive income and wealth inequality, the last thing we should be doing is giving more tax breaks to the very rich. Democrats campaigned and won on an agenda that demands that the very wealthy finally pay their fair share, not one that gives them more tax breaks.

Meanwhile, Democrats want to squeeze an extra $200 billion out of American taxpayers by mostly targeting working and middle class earners with more Internal Revenue Services (IRS) audits.

The plan ensures nearly 600,000 more working and middle class Americans earning $75,000 or less a year would be audited by the IRS. Of those new IRS audits, more than 313,000 would target the poorest of Americans who earn $25,000 or less a year.

In 2017, former President Trump had the SALT deduction capped at $10,000. Since then, Democrats have sought to deliver their wealthy, blue state donors with a massive tax cut by eliminating the cap altogether or greatly increasing it.

Biden, for instance, had sought to include tax cuts for his billionaire donors in a Chinese coronavirus relief package earlier this year. The plan was ultimately cut from the package. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), in May 2020, also tried to include the plan in a coronavirus relief package.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here

 

A Slip of the Tongue in the Supreme Court

 By Terence P. Jeffrey | March 9, 2022 | 4:11am EST

  

Pro-Life Americans pray outside the U.S. Supreme Court on October 2, 2021. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)
Pro-Life Americans pray outside the U.S. Supreme Court on October 2, 2021. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)

When lawyer Sarah Weddington stood up in the Supreme Court on Oct. 11, 1972, to present the pro-abortion argument in the case of Roe v. Wade, she was legalistically careful in the language she used to describe whom exactly an abortion aborted.

She avoided normal human terms like "unborn child" or "baby" — and, most importantly, "person."

She preferred "fetus."

Presumably, this was because the Fourteenth Amendment states, "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Justice Byron White, one of only two justices who would end up dissenting from the court's opinion that there was a "right" to abortion, pushed Weddington on the precise question of whether the unborn children killed by abortions were in fact persons.

"Several of the briefs before this Court would also argue that this Court, in deciding the Vuitch case, which has allowed abortions to continue in the District of Columbia, certainly the Court would not have made that kind of decision if it felt there were any ingrained rights of the fetus within the Constitution," Weddington told the court.

After she said this, White engaged her in a pointed line of questioning.

"Is it critical to your case that the fetus not be a person under the Due Process Clause?" asked this justice, who had been nominated by President John F. Kennedy.

"It seems to me," Weddington said, "that it is critical first that we prove this is a fundamental interest on behalf of the woman, that it is a constitutional right and, second—"

White interrupted her. "Yes, but how about the fetus?" he asked.

"Okay and, second that the state has no compelling state interest," she said, evading his question. "Okay, and the state is alleging a compelling state interest."

White persisted. "Yes, but I'm just asking you, under the federal Constitution, is the fetus a person for the purpose of the protection of the Due Process Clause?"

"All of the cases, the prior history of this statute, the common law history, would indicate that it is not," said Weddington. "The state has shown no—"

White interrupted her again. "Well," he said, "what if — Would you lose your case if the fetus was a person?"

"Then you would have a balancing of interests," Weddington responded.

"You have anyway, don't you?" said White.

"Excuse me?" said Weddington.

"You have any way, don't you?" White repeated. "You're going to be balancing the rights of the mother against the rights of the fetus."

But Weddington would not concede that a "fetus" had constitutional rights.

"It seems to me that you do not balance constitutional rights of one person against mere statutory rights of another," she said.

A moment later, however, she conceded that the situation might be different if the state could establish that a fetus was a person.

"If the state could show that the fetus was a person under the Fourteenth Amendment or under some other amendment or part of the Constitution then you would have ... a state compelling interest which, in some instances, can outweigh a fundamental right," she said.

"This is not the case in this particular situation," she claimed.

In December, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a case that challenges the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The Biden administration opposes the Mississippi law. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar participated in the oral arguments against it that were presented in the Supreme Court.

Justice Clarence Thomas confronted her with a fundamental question.

"The court has never revoked a right that is so fundamental to so many Americans and so central to their ability to participate fully and equally in society," Prelogar said in her argument. "The court should not overrule this central component of women's liberty."

"General," Thomas asked her, "would you ... specifically state what the right is? Is it specifically abortion? Is it liberty? Is it autonomy? Is it privacy?"

Prelogar, in responding, was not as circumspect as Weddington had been in the terminology she used to describe the target of an abortion.

"The right is grounded in the liberty component of the Fourteenth Amendment, Justice Thomas," she said, "but I think it promotes interest in autonomy, bodily integrity, liberty, and equality. And I do think that it is specifically the right to abortion here, the right of a woman to be able to control, without the state forcing her to continue a pregnancy, whether to carry that baby to term."

So the target of an abortion, according to the argument President Joe Biden's solicitor general made in the Supreme Court, is "that baby."

Is "that baby" a human being? Is "that baby" a person? Does "that baby" have a right to life?

Of course.

(Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor-in-chief of CNSNews.com.)

No comments: