Randall A. Terry, Founder, Operation Rescue
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Unreasonable Access: Disguised Issue Advocacy and the First Amendment Status of Broadcasters
[WORKING DRAFT-FESC CONFERENCE, MAY 2014 PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE] UNREASONABLE ACCESS: DISGUISED ISSUE ADVOCACY AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT STATUS OF BROADCASTERS Kerry L. Monroe* Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1! I. Candidate Political Broadcasting Rights ............................................................ 8! A. History and Purposes of Statutory Political Broadcasting Rights ............... 9! 1.! Equal Opportunities for Candidates for Elective Office .................... 10! 2.! Reasonable Access and Lowest Unit Rate ......................................... 11! B. Regulatory Implementation of Reasonable Access ..................................... 13! C. Court Consideration of the Constitutionality of Reasonable Access .......... 15! II. Gaming the System—Pretextual Candidates ..................................................... 20! A. Incentives to Game the System ................................................................... 20! B. FCC Tolerance of Pretextual Candidates .................................................... 23! III. Walking the Tightrope of Broadcast Regulation .............................................. 28! A. Pursuing Communications Policy Through Structural Regulation ............. 28! 1.! The Origin of Congress’s Regulatory Power over Broadcast ........... 29! 2.! Regulating Broadcast to Pursue Communications Policy ................. 35! B. Reasonable Access and the Means-Ends Fit of the Commission’s Prophylactic -
Protests Say: Abortion Is a Woman's Right to Choose!
· AUSTRALIA $1.50 · CANADA $1.25 · FRANCE 1.00 EURO · NEW ZEALAND $1.50 · SWEDEN KR10 · UK £.50 · U.S. $1.00 INSIDE How attempts to shut abortion clinics were defeated in early ’90s — PAGE 9 A SOCIALIST NEWSWEEKLY PUBLISHED IN THE INTERESTS OF WORKING PEOPLE VOL. 73/NO. 23 JUNE 15, 2009 Washington Protests say: abortion is a seeks new sanctions woman’s right to choose! Vigils condemn killing of clinic doctor in Kansas on N. Korea BY TED LEONARD BY BEN Joyce AND MAGGIE TROWE The U.S. government and its impe- WICHITA, Kansas—Just hours af- rialist allies have condemned a recent ter Dr. George Tiller was shot to death, nuclear test and missile launches by about 400 people joined a candlelight North Korea. Washington and Tokyo vigil here May 31 to protest his killing are pressing for a UN resolution to and defend a woman’s right to choose impose more punitive sanctions and abortion. other measures against the country In nearby Lawrence 150 people for daring to challenge their dictates. participated in a similar vigil that Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to night. In the days following the doc- the United Nations, said June 1 that tor’s death, similar events took place the UN Security Council was “mak- throughout Kansas and the Midwest, ing progress” in coming up with a and across the country. new resolution that may involve new sanctions on North Korea. A partial MOBILIZE TO DEFEND draft of the resolution obtained by the Associated Press May 29 calls on WOMEN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE! all governments “immediately to en- Editorial —p. -
Issues Raised by the Abortion Rescue Movement Charles E
Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 1989 Issues Raised by the Abortion Rescue Movement Charles E. Rice Notre Dame Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Health Law and Policy Commons, and the Human Rights Law Commons Recommended Citation Charles E. Rice, Issues Raised by the Abortion Rescue Movement, 23 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 15 (1989). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/316 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ISSUES RAISED BY THE ABORTION RESCUE MOVEMENT Charles E. Rice* The civil rights protests of the fifties and sixties taught the nation about the relation of the enacted law to the higher law of justice. Though less favorably publicized, the abortion rescue movement provides another such teaching moment today. As with the civil rights protests, the abor- tion rescue movement involves ordinary people putting their bodies on the line-and in jail-to vindicate their conception of justice. The rescue movement raises issues that transcend the question of whether one ap- proves or disapproves of abortion. This paper examines what society might learn from the Operation Rescue movement about the weaknesses of our law. A Newsweek commentary entitled Operation Rescue captured the movement's essence: Abortion is the most painfully divisive issue in American public life, and after years of relative dormancy, it shows signs of erupting again. -
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Case 3:16-cv-00236-WHO Document 1073 Filed 04/29/20 Page 1 of 48 1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION Case No. 16-cv-00236-WHO OF AMERICA, INC., et al., 1 7 Plaintiffs, ORDER RESOLVING UNFAIR 8 COMPETITION CLAIM AND v. ENTERING JUDGMENT 9 CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS, et Re: Dkt. Nos. 1048, 1059 2 10 al., Defendants. 11 12 INTRODUCTION 13 This Order addresses plaintiffs’ Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) claim arising under 14 California Business & Professions Code section 17200 et seq. and their request for a permanent 15 injunction, and enters Judgment. It follows a trial that commenced on October 2, 2019 and ended 16 with the jury’s verdict, which was overwhelmingly in plaintiffs’ favor, on November 15, 2019. I 17 now find in plaintiffs’ favor on the UCL claim; an abundance of evidence supports it. I enter a United States District Court District United States Northern District of California District Northern 18 permanent injunction against the defendants, although more limited than sought by plaintiffs. And 19 I enter Judgment in accordance with the verdict and the orders that preceded it.3 20 21 1 Plaintiffs, as identified in the Final Preliminary Jury Instructions (Dkt. No. 850) are Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA); Planned Parenthood: Shasta-Diablo, Inc. dba Planned 22 Parenthood Northern California (PPNorCal); Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, Inc. (PPMM); Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest (PPPSW); Planned Parenthood Los Angeles (PPLA); 23 Planned Parenthood/Orange and San Bernardino Counties (PPOSBC); Planned Parenthood California Central Coast (PPCCC); Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley, Inc. -
'Us Versus Them': Abortion and the Rhetoric of the New Right1
Retrospectives | 2 Spring 2013 ! ‘Us versus Them’: Abortion and the Rhetoric of the New Right1 Will Riddington* This paper analyses America's anti-abortion movement from a rhetorical perspective. It examines the rhetorical tactics used by conservative elites to galvanise the movement and traces their effect on the movement's response to anti-abortion violence in the late 1980s and early 1990. It concludes by arguing that the fusion of populist dichotomies and religious justifications had an ultimately negative effect on the movement, despite initial successes. It engages with a number of historiographical debates surrounding the emergence of the New Right and its place in the wider American political tradition. By analysing the anti-abortion movement, its motivations and its actions, this paper will argue that although the movement invoked a number of long-standing conservative themes, its invocation of populism relied on new rhetorical devices whose resonance derived from opposition to sixties liberalism. Historiographical debate also revolves around the relationship between New Right activists and the Republican party, some arguing that conservative grassroots activism dragged the GOP to the right, others that social issues were manipulated by Republican elites for electoral gain. It will argue that, at least in the case of the anti-abortion movement, the fundamentalist and evangelical Christians who joined the fray in the late 1970s !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 This work was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council [grant number AH/K502959/1]. * Will Riddington is a first-year doctoral student at the University of Cambridge. 86 Retrospectives | 2 Spring 2013 ! did so at the urging of the New Right and their pastors, rather than as part of a spontaneous grassroots uprising. -
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Case3:15-cv-03522-WHO Document1 Filed07/31/15 Page1 of 60 1 LINDA E. SHOSTAK (CA SBN 64599) [email protected] 2 DEREK F. FORAN (CA SBN 224569) [email protected] 3 CHRISTOPHER L. ROBINSON (CA SBN 260778) [email protected] 4 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street 5 San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 6 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION (NAF), Case No. 13 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES 14 v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 15 THE CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS, BIOMAX PROCUREMENT SERVICES, LLC, 16 DAVID DALEIDEN (aka “ROBERT SARKIS”), and TROY NEWMAN, 17 Defendants. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES Case3:15-cv-03522-WHO Document1 Filed07/31/15 Page2 of 60 1 National Abortion Federation (“NAF” or “Plaintiff”) brings this action against The Center 2 for Medical Progress, Biomax Procurement Services, LLC, David Daleiden (aka “Robert 3 Sarkis”), and Troy Newman (“Defendants”): 4 INTRODUCTION 5 1. This case is about an admitted, outrageous conspiracy to defraud, carried out by 6 extremist anti-abortion activists against NAF and its constituent members, and perpetrated for the 7 purpose of intimidating and harassing providers of abortion care services to women, and to end 8 access to reproductive health services in America. Defendants The Center for Medical Progress 9 (“CMP”), David Daleiden, Troy Newman and individuals acting in concert with them conspired 10 to defraud and did defraud NAF by setting up a fake company (Defendant “Biomax Procurement 11 Services”), which held itself out as a legitimate fetal tissue procurement organization. -
42 Kansas History Assembling a Buckle of the Bible Belt: from Enclave to Powerhouse by Jay M
Immanuel Baptist Church, with its towering cross, in downtown Wichita, Kansas. Courtesy of Jay M. Price. Kansas History: A Journal of the Central Plains 41 (Spring 2018): 42-61 42 Kansas History Assembling a Buckle of the Bible Belt: From Enclave to Powerhouse by Jay M. Price n Sunday, July 14, 1991, Bob Knight, mayor of Wichita, Kansas, had just delivered a talk at a local church when Chief of Police Rick Stone came up and warned him that “we’re going to have some very difficult circumstances tomorrow.” Operation Rescue, an antiabortion organization, intended to picket local abortion facilities. In particular, Operation Rescue leaders such as Randall Terry wanted to organize local and national antiabortion efforts to focus national attention on abortion providers such as George Tiller. Stone noted that “they’ll Oblock, they’ll protest, first of all, but they’ve been known to block entrances.” Knight responded that these actions “shouldn’t be insurmountable to enforce our laws.” If there were arrests, he presumed that ordinary law enforcement channels would suffice. The next morning, July 15, Knight received a call from Ryder Truck Rental concerned that protesters who had gathered outside Tiller’s office were being arrested and loaded into the company’s rented vehicles. In the days that followed, the arrests did not dissuade the protesters. In fact, the protests grew, and police efforts included helicopters flying overhead and blocking Kellogg Avenue. Initially, the protesters had envisioned a week-long series of events, including rallies and training in how to blockade the entrances to abortion clinics and intercept women going to the clinics. -
Disguised Issue Advocacy and the First Amendment Status of Broadcasters
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 25 Volume XXV Number 1 Volume XXV Book 1 Article 3 2014 Unreasonable Access: Disguised Issue Advocacy and the First Amendment Status of Broadcasters Kerry L. Monroe Yale University Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Kerry L. Monroe, Unreasonable Access: Disguised Issue Advocacy and the First Amendment Status of Broadcasters, 25 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 117 (2014). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj/vol25/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Unreasonable Access: Disguised Issue Advocacy and the First Amendment Status of Broadcasters Cover Page Footnote Ph.D. candidate in Law, class of 2016, Yale University; J.D., 2010, University of Michigan Law School. I would like to thank Floyd Abrams, Jack Balkin, Vince Blasi, Molly Brady, Rebecca Crootof, Zach Herz, Eric Fish, Robert Post, Richard Primus, Reva Siegel, Gordon Silverstein, Rory Van Loo, and participants in the 2014 Freedom of Expression Scholars Conference at Yale Law School for their comments on earlier drafts of this Article. In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I represented the broadcasters who were subject to the October 2012 FCC decisions discussed in this Article, along with my former colleagues at Covington & Burling LLP. -
Fulton John Sheen, American Roman Catholic
Evangelicals and Democracy in America: General Timeline 1927 – 1962: Robert “Bob” Reynolds Jones, Sr., an American Fundamentalist Christian evangelist, launches daily and weekly network programs on the East Coast.1 1927: Robert “Bob” Reynolds Jones, Sr. founds Bob Jones College in Bay County, FL. In 1947, the college moves to Greenville, SC, admits 2,500 students, and changes its name to Bob Jones University (BJU).2 1927: Father Charles Edward Coughlin, a Roman Catholic priest, gives first Catholic services on the radio. In 1930, CBS picks up Coughlin‟s radio show and broadcasts it over its national network, which is the first time such a program is broadcasted over a national network. In 1932, Coughlin strongly supports FDR‟s presidential bid – “Roosevelt or Ruin.” Within a few years, however, Coughlin becomes a vociferous critic of FDR. In 1934, Coughlin sets up the National Union for Social Justice Organization.3 In 1938, Coughlin “indirectly” sets up the Christian Front (via a 23 May 1938 Social Justice article) with the basic organizational unit being the “platoon.”4 Also in 1938, Coughlin publishes a version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.5 Finally, in 1938, 10 November – Kristallnacht – Coughlin states, “Jewish persecution only followed after Christians first were persecuted.”6 1936: Father John Ryan, a Roman Catholic priest, social reformer, and university educator denounces Father Coughlin for his “ugly, cowardly and flagrant” attacks on FDR.7 1939: The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) adopts its first industry code, which has provisions covering religion that are believed to have been an attempt to bar Father Coughlin from buying airtime.8 1941: The FCC establishes the Chain Broadcasting Regulations, which governs the licensing and content of chain broadcasting stations. -
2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTOR CANDIDATES (As of September 7, 2012)
2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTOR CANDIDATES (as of September 7, 2012) Constitution Party (write-in candidates) Pledged to Virgil H. Goode, Jr., of Virginia for President Joseph O. Henzler, of Indianapolis Audrey Queckboerner, of Leo Austin Teltoe, of Indianapolis Elyne Strauss, of Indianapolis Eric Johnson, of Bloomington Gary Queckboerner, of Leo Fred Bailey, of Fort Wayne Democratic Party: Pledged to Barack Obama of Illinois for President and Joe Biden of Delaware for Vice-President Clay M. Patton, of Valparaiso Michael Schmuhl, of South Bend Randy S. Schmidt, of Fort Wayne Jeffrey S. Fites, of Brownsburg James A. Schellinger, of Indianapolis Beverly Matthews, of New Castle Lacy M. Johnson, of Indianapolis Sherrianne M. Standley, of Evansville Dustin T. White, of Jeffersonville Katherine L. Davis, of Indianapolis Robin E. Winston, of Indianapolis Freedom Socialist Party (write-in candidates) Pledged to Stephen Durham of New York for President Susan E. Williams, of New York, New York Elizabeth Maloney, of Newark, New Jersey Freedom Socialist Party (write-in candidates) Pledged to Christina Lopez, of Washington for President Doug Barnes, of Seattle, Washington Doreen McGrath, of Seattle, Washington Christopher Smith, of Seattle, Washington Green Party (write-in candidates) Pledged to Jill Stein of Massachusetts for President Andrew Straw, of Goshen Beth Hayes, of Indianapolis Jay Parks, of Indianapolis Jeff Sutter, of South Bend John Loflin, of Indianapolis Kathleen Petitjean, of Mishawaka Kevin McCracken, of Columbus Michael Berndt, of Bloomington Neal Smith, of Indianapolis Pam Raider, of Nashville Sarah Dillon, of Terre Haute Libertarian Party: Pledged to Gary Johnson of New Mexico for President and James P. Gray of California for Vice-President Sam Goldstein, of Indianapolis Brad Klopfenstein, of Indianapolis Chris Spangle, of Greenwood Dan Drexler, of Indianapolis Mike Kole, of Fishers Jerry Titus, of Kokomo Susan Bell, of Hagerstown Paul Morrell, of Arlington Matt Wittlief, of Indianapolis Andy Wolf, of LaPorte Beth Duensing, of St. -
2012 General Election Results
2012 General Election November 6 Official Results Ballots Counted Mailin Ballots Distributed: 137,711 Mailin: 130,252 Total Registered: 248,903 Early Voting: 17,750 Active Voters: 187,962 Polling Place: 32,710 Expected Turnout: 173,890 Total: 180,712 Website last updated: 10:00 AM, Nov. 21, 2012 Complete Results PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS Votes Percent VIRGIL H GOODE JR / JIM CLYMER AMERICAN CONSTITUTION 262 0.15% BARACK OBAMA / JOE BIDEN DEMOCRATIC 125,091 69.69% MITT ROMNEY / PAUL RYAN REPUBLICAN 49,981 27.84% GARY JOHNSON / JAMES P GRAY LIBERTARIAN 2,794 1.56% JILL STEIN / CHERI HONKALA GREEN 870 0.48% STEWART ALEXANDER / ALEX MENDOZA SOCIALIST USA 16 0.01% ROSS C ROCKY ANDERSON / LUIS J RODRIGUEZ JUSTICE 99 0.06% ROSEANNE BARR / CINDY LEE SHEEHAN PEACE AND FREEDOM 202 0.11% JAMES HARRIS / ALYSON KENNEDY SOCIALIST WORKERS 5 0.00% TOM HOEFLING / JONATHAN D ELLIS AMERICA'S 19 0.01% GLORIA LA RIVA / FILBERTO RAMIREZ JR SOCIALISM AND LIBERATION 9 0.01% MERLIN MILLER / HARRY V BERTRAM AMERICAN THIRD POSITION 16 0.01% JILL REED / TOM CARY UNAFFILIATED 87 0.05% THOMAS ROBERT STEVENS / ALDEN LINK OBJECTIVIST 14 0.01% SHEILA SAMM TITTLE / MATTHEW A TURNER WE THE PEOPLE 22 0.01% JERRY WHITE / PHYLLIS SCHERRER SOCIALIST EQUALITY 12 0.01% RANDALL TERRY / MISSY REILLY SMITH INDEPENDENT / REPUBLICAN 0 0.00% Total Votes: 179,499 REPRESENTATIVE TO THE 113TH UNITED STATES CONGRESS DISTRICT 2 Votes Percent KEVIN LUNDBERG REPUBLICAN 27,623 21.54% JARED POLIS DEMOCRATIC 93,758 73.11% RANDY LUALLIN LIBERTARIAN 3,922 3.06% SUSAN P HALL GREEN 2,934 2.29% -
Nos. 20-16068, 20-16070, 20-16773, 20-16820
Case: 20-16068, 07/26/2021, ID: 12183247, DktEntry: 72, Page 1 of 42 Nos. 20-16068, 20-16070, 20-16773, 20-16820 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., et al. Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Troy Newman, et al. Defendants-Appellants On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Hon. William H. Orrick, United States District Judge Case No. 3:16-cv-00236-WHO Brief Amici Curiae of Feminist Majority Foundation, Physicians for Reproductive Health, and Abortion Care Network in Support of Appellees and Affirmance Susan J. Frietsche Krysten L. Connon* Women’s Law Project Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C. Western Pennsylvania Office 729 Boylston Street #2000 428 Forbes Avenue, Suite 1710 Boston, MA 02116 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 [email protected] (412) 281-2892 (617) 994-5800 Christine Castro * Counsel of Record for Amici Curiae Women’s Law Project 125 S. Ninth Street, Suite 300 Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 928-9801 Case: 20-16068, 07/26/2021, ID: 12183247, DktEntry: 72, Page 2 of 42 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Amici Curiae Feminist Majority Foundation, Physicians for Reproductive Health, and Abortion Care Network make the following disclosures: 1) For non-governmental corporate parties please list all parent corporations: None. 2) For non-governmental corporate parties please list all publicly held companies that hold 10% or more of the party’s stock: None. Dated: July 26, 2021 /s/ Krysten L. Connon Krysten L. Connon -i- Case: 20-16068, 07/26/2021, ID: 12183247, DktEntry: 72, Page 3 of 42 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE .............................................................................