Category

LBB

Drama at Supreme Court on Texas Abortion Law Case

By | LBB, Legal, News and Events, Texas | No Comments

If there is drama at the U.S. Supreme Court these days, you can rest assured that Justice Sonia Sotomayor is at the center of it. And when the issue in the case is protecting unborn babies, you already know the side for which she fights. So here is why you are hearing so much about her and what the U.S. Supreme Court did in the Texas abortion law case.

If you remember, last time, the Supreme Court dismissed most of the challenges against the law but left the one against the medical licensing officials to go on. That is the case the Fifth Circuit was to consider when Texas asked that the question of whether the medical licensing official can enforce the law if it is violated be sent to the Texas State Supreme Court for clarification as to what the state law allows. The Fifth Circuit allowed that to proceed. This makes sense because the case deals with state law, not federal law.

The pro-abortion side objected to this because it would cause a delay in the proceedings while the law is still in effect. So, they went back to the U.S. Supreme Court and asked it to intervene to stop the case from going to the Texas Supreme Court. The Supreme Court denied the request, making no judgment, but simply allowing the proceedings to continue.

That’s where the pro-abortion advocates at the Supreme Court led by Justice Sonia Sotomayor lost it. They dissented with much fanfare, saying, “The Fifth Circuit should have immediately remanded this case to the District Court, allowing it to consider whether to issue preliminary relief.” Imagine all these babies being born in Texas. Preposterous, in their view. It is a disaster as far as Justice Sotomayor is concerned. She wrote, “This case is a disaster for the rule of law and a grave disservice to women in Texas, who have a right to control their own bodies. I will not stand by silently as a State continues to nullify this constitutional guarantee.”

Aside from the forceful pro-abortion advocacy of Justice Sotomayor, supported by Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, not a lot has happened in the case. It is still ongoing. Texas may still lose in the end. The ruckus you read about in the media is the early signs of desperation from the pro-abortion side.

It is a preview of what we can expect when the Dobbs decision is handed down if it does not live up to their abortion on demand for any reason up to birth dreamland.

CWA Stands for Religious Freedom and the Christian Flag at the Supreme Court

By | LBB, Legal, News and Events | No Comments

Today, Concerned Women for America (CWA) was proud to stand for the Christian principles of our founding in an important First Amendment case before the United States Supreme Court. Annabelle Rutledge, National Director of CWA’s Young Women for America program, delivered an impassioned speech (below) in front of the Court as they heard oral arguments in Shurtleff v. Boston.

 

Statement by Annabelle Rutledge
National Director
Concerned Women for America’s Young Women for America
Delivered January 13, 2022, at the United States Supreme Court
Shurtleff v. Boston Oral Arguments Rally

Good morning everyone

My name is Annabelle Rutledge from Concerned Women for America, the largest public policy organization for women in the nation. I serve as the national director of CWA’s Young Women for America project, which is training the next generation of young women on the Christian and constitutional principles that are the foundation of our liberties and freedoms.

I stand here on behalf of hundreds of thousands of women who want to see an end to the pernicious hostility towards religion that has become all too common in our day and age. If we are being honest, the hostility we see in many cases is directed specifically at Christians.

Many Americans fail to realize that the very foundations of the liberties they enjoy sprout out of Biblical soil. Therefore, in attacking religion as a whole, and Christianity more specifically, they work against their own interests, against their own liberty.

This case is a prime example that sometimes the loudest voices crying for diversity and tolerance are the most intolerant of diversity when that diversity is also inclusive of people of faith with whom they disagree.

The City of Boston has a worthy goal for its flagpole policy in its city hall plaza. The city explained that it wants “to create an environment in the City where everyone feels included and is treated with respect.” Except that “everyone,” according to the City of Boston, does not include Christians—we are apparently the right kind of people to exclude.

The city’s website further explains their policy this way, “We also want to raise awareness in Greater Boston and beyond about the many countries and cultures around the world. Our goal is to foster diversity and build and strengthen connections among Boston’s many communities.”

Accordingly, LGBTQ+ communities are loudly celebrated, their flag displayed with pride, no pun intended. Likewise, flags with Muslim themes from countries other than our own are welcomed with open arms. “Yay, diversity!”

But the flag that represents the faith of the very people who founded the City of Boston (the Puritans) that flag is just not welcomed. For Boston, diversity stops at Christianity’s doorsteps.

Needless to say, this nonsensical policy stands in clear violation of the First Amendment to our Constitution, which states plainly, as applied to the states, that the city “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….” In targeting religious speech and somehow saying it is unworthy of the same protections afforded other types of speech, the city violates the most basic principles of justice and fairness, not to mention the essence of our First Amendment.

As we pointed out in our brief before the Court, the city’s attempt to differentiate between religious organizations and civic organizations fails to recognize the nature of our faith. By their very nature, religious organizations are civic organizations. Our concern for the poor and needy, for the weak and oppressed, and for justice and righteousness cannot be contained to the four walls of a building. Call that building a church or call it what you want.

Our faith is a living faith. We are called to go and love our neighbors. We cannot do otherwise.

That faith gave birth to many of the freedoms we enjoy. The faith that is at the root of the City of Boston, whose very city flag contains its motto in Latin words that read, “God be with us as he was with our fathers.”

Fitting, since from the founding of our country, churches have been the most important civic institution, bringing incredible progress. It is why the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 declared that “religion, morality, and knowledge [were] necessary to good government.”

The words of John Adams also stand as a similar reminder when he said that “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Religion and faith are not only compatible with our Constitution; they are indispensable to its proper understanding.

We are confident the Supreme Court understands this, and we expect a unanimous Court to send a clear message by striking down this unconstitutional policy.

Thank you.

Click here for a PDF version of the statement.

Sensible Supreme Court Opinion Halts Vaccine Mandate

By | Briefs, Case Vault, Gorsuch, LBB, Legal, News and Events | No Comments

In a “per curiam” opinion, meaning a decision authored by the entire Court, instead of a single justice, the United States Supreme Court granted a stay of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) vaccine mandate for employers with 100 or more workers. The rule, therefore, will not go into effect until the case goes through the entire appellate process.

But the Court’s division can be further assessed by the fact that the three more liberal justices—Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan— dissented from the opinion, and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined a very strong concurring opinion by Justice Neil Gorsuch.

The Court’s sensible approach to the issue simply noted that OSHA’s “emergency standard,” which it used here and which circumvents the usual public notice and comment accountability processes, should be used with precision and caution. Instead, the Court notes that the OSHA rule which applies to 84 million workers “requires workers receive a COVID-19 vaccine, and it pre-empts contrary state laws,” works as “a blunt instrument.” It found the exemptions presented (for employees who work outside 100 percent of the time or who work exclusively outdoors, for example) were “largely illusory.” The rule “draws no distinctions based on industry or risk of exposure to COVID-19.”

The Court found those objecting to the rule were “likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that [OSHA] lack[s] authority to impose the mandate.”

In doing so, the Supreme Court returns power to the states and the people, where it belongs, because the vaccine mandate goes way beyond establishing a simple workplace standard, as the agency is charged to enact, and into establishing nationwide public health policy. Remember, OSHA has never in its history done anything like this.

And here is where Justice Gorsuch’s concurrence is extremely helpful because it acknowledges what most Americans understand. This administrative mandate is trying to accomplish what President Joe Biden could not get done through the people’s representatives. He is trying to enact something Congress up until now has rejected.

If the people want a vaccine mandate, they could easily demand it from Congress. The reality is most people do not. In fact, the President’s approval numbers have been steadily declining. The latest numbers show him at an all-time low of 33 percent.  Fifty-five percent disapprove of his handling of the pandemic.

That is why President Biden had to work through OSHA to establish this national vaccine mandate. He lacks the necessary support to do it otherwise.

Justice Gorsuch wrote:

The central question we face today is: Who decides? No one doubts that the COVID–19 pandemic has posed challenges for every American. Or that our state, local, and national governments all have roles to play in combating the disease. The only question is whether an administrative agency in Washington, one charged with overseeing workplace safety, may mandate the vaccination or regular testing of 84 million people. Or whether, as 27 States before us submit, that work belongs to state and local governments across the country and the people’s elected representatives in Congress.

That power belongs to the people, said the Supreme Court today—to those most immediately accountable to them. The concurrence noticed that “a majority of the Senate even voted to disapprove OSHA’s regulation.” Therefore, it seemed reasonable to conclude “the agency pursued its regulatory initiative only as a legislative ‘work-around.’”

With this decision, the Court re-affirms what it has said in the past, that major questions of doctrine with broad effects on the public are left to the people’s elected representatives, and that they must make it very clear when they are giving such broad power to an agency. The concurrence said this rule, known as the “major questions doctrine”:

[E]nsures that the national government’s power to make the laws that govern us remains where Article I of the Constitution says it belongs—with the people’s elected representatives. If administrative agencies seek to regulate the daily lives and liberties of millions of Americans, the doctrine says, they must at least be able to trace that power to a clear grant of authority from Congress.

And even then, the concurrence suspects that such an intrusive mandate brought through the backdoor of an administrative agency might run afoul of the “nondelegation doctrine,” which “ensures democratic accountability by preventing Congress from intentionally delegating its legislative powers to unelected officials.”

Justice Gorsuch concludes:

On the one hand, OSHA claims the power to issue a nationwide mandate on a major question but cannot trace its authority to do so to any clear congressional mandate. On the other hand, if the statutory subsection the agency cites really did endow OSHA with the power it asserts, that law would likely constitute an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority.

Whatever your view of the COVID vaccine in general, it should be encouraging to all to see the Court protecting the Constitutional structures that guard our liberties in this way. As Justice Gorsuch put it, “The question before us is not how to respond to the pandemic, but who holds the power to do so.”

The rule will be halted for now, but the case will continue. As we await further proceedings let us pray for a wiser, more honest, and unifying approach to fighting the pandemic going forward.

Supreme Court Releases Opinions in Texas Abortion Law Cases

By | CWA of Texas, Dobbs, LBB, Legal, News and Events, Sanctity of Life, SCOTUS | No Comments

As we discussed recently, the state of Texas presented a novel problem to the United States Supreme Court by enacting a law prohibiting abortions after a heartbeat is detected, but giving the right of enforcement to private citizens and not to any state official. Today, the Court handed down its opinion dismissing most of the claims but preserving the challenge going forward. Here is a short summary.

When abortionists sought to challenge S. B. 8, the Texas Heartbeat Act, they really had no one to sue because no state official is charged with its enforcement and no private citizen had sued. Still, they tried to push the legal envelope by suing a whole host of people, including state judges or state law clerks, the attorney general, some licensing officials, and even a potential private citizen defendant in an effort to enjoin the law and prevent it from going into effect.

The United States also tried to intervene, given its radical pro-abortion stance under President Joe Biden. That was the easy part (United States v. Texas). Its claim was summarily dismissed by the Court (8-1), as expected, with only Justice Sotomayor dissenting. The United States simply has no business interfering with this state law and basically seeking an unprecedented injunction against all persons in the country. Their effort would break with the most fundamental principles of federalism in our Constitution.

The more interesting challenge (Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson) is a bit more complicated. In its opinion, the Court wanted to stress first what it was not deciding. “In this preliminary posture, the ultimate merits question, whether S. B. 8 is consistent with the Federal Constitution, is not before the Court,” said Justice Neil Gorsuch who wrote the majority opinion.

He summarized, “The Court concludes that the petitioners may pursue a pre-enforcement challenge against certain of the named defendants but not others.” So, who can be sued? Well, not court officials: “Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, named defendants Penny Clarkston (a state-court clerk) and Austin Jackson (a state court judge) should be dismissed.” Not the attorney general: “Texas Attorney General Paxton should be dismissed.” And not a private citizen prematurely (an affidavit showed he had no intention to sue): “The sole private defendant, Mr. Dickson, should be dismissed.”

But the Court leaves open “other defendants (Stephen Carlton, Katherine Thomas, Allison Benz, and Cecile Young), each of whom is an executive licensing official who may or must take enforcement actions against the petitioners if the petitioners violate the terms of Texas’s Health and Safety Code, including S. B. 8. Eight Members of the Court hold that sovereign immunity does not bar a pre-enforcement challenge to S. B. 8 against these defendants.”

Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from this last pronouncement, saying he would have dismissed the case against “all respondents, including the four licensing officials.”

It also declared “petitioners may bring a pre-enforcement challenge in federal court as one means to test S. B. 8’s compliance with the Federal Constitution. Other pre-enforcement challenges are possible too; one such case is ongoing in state court in which the plaintiffs have raised both federal and state constitutional claims against S. B. 8. Any individual sued under S. B. 8 may raise state and federal constitutional arguments in his or her defense without limitation.”

So, the bottom line is that the challenge to this law will continue as to the allowed defendants.

It is important to note that Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor, expressed considerable frustration with the law in concurring in part and dissenting in part. He wrote, “Texas has employed an array of stratagems designed to shield its unconstitutional law from judicial review.”

It seems clear the Chief views the law as an attack on the Court itself. “The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court’s rulings … Indeed, ‘[i]f the legislatures of the several states may, at will, annul the judgments of the courts of the United States, and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments, the constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery.’[] The nature of the federal right infringed does not matter; it is the role of the Supreme Court in our constitutional system that is at stake,” he wrote.

We will have to wait for a further challenge to see where the more conservative justices land on the issue.

As I mentioned before, this problem is of the Court’s own making, by injecting itself into the political abortion debate. Texas is simply trying to protect life, which most of its citizens demand, and trying to work within the arbitrary and dubious parameters the Supreme Court has set up. The best way for the Court to guard its legitimacy would be to reverse Roe and Casey in the Dobbs case, and then states like Texas would be free to protect life, without having to come up with innovative ideas to appease the Supreme Court’s personal preferences.

Indefensible Roe — An Introduction

By | Case Vault, Dobbs, LBB, Legal, News and Events, SCOTUS, Substack | No Comments

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Mississippi case where abortionists are challenging the state’s “Gestational Age Act,” should force the United States Supreme Court to reevaluate its disastrous abortion jurisprudence.

Because Mississippi’s law places strict limits on abortion after 15 weeks, it runs straight up against the Court’s nonsensical and arbitrary “viability” pronouncement which has somewhat guided the Court through its oversight of more than 60 million babies aborted since 1973. In Roe v. Wade, the Court invented a right to abortion out of nothing and established limits based on an arbitrary trimester framework, but it also recognized a state’s interests in the health of mothers and “potential life,” as it cunningly termed babies in the womb. Only when those state interests become “compelling” are states able to regulate abortion, perhaps even ban it.  The Court explained:

With respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the “compelling” point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb. State regulation protective of fetal life after viability thus has both logical and biological justifications. If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.

The Court’s mushy pronouncement ensured it would continue to act as a super-legislature, second-guessing virtually every state attempt to protect life. Therefore, we continue to see a never-ending series of cases at the Supreme Court with citizens from different states trying to assert their interests in the health of mothers and protecting children in the womb…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

On the Maine Vaccine Mandate Case Before the U.S. Supreme Court

By | Case Vault, LBB, Legal, News and Events, SCOTUS | No Comments

In a recent emergency application before the United States Supreme Court, the justices declined an appeal from Maine health care workers to stop the enforcement of a vaccine mandate that did not contain a religious exemption. Though certainly disappointing, those concerned with these oppressive vaccine mandates should not read much into the denial, and indeed should be encouraged by Justice Neil Gorsuch’s excellent discussion of the legal principles involved which Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined.

It was disappointing that Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh declined to hear the case, but we should note their denial was a technical one as to the timing of the appeal. “[D]iscretionary consideration counsels against a grant of extraordinary [emergency] relief in this case, which is the first to address the questions presented,” wrote Justice Barrett. Practically all she wrote in her one-paragraph concurring opinion.

The bottom line is that the Supreme Court will end up taking one of the many cases challenging these vaccine mandates soon, and I am extremely confident that, at the very least, a religious exemption will be required.

Any government or private entity taking action against a worker’s request for religious accommodation does so at their own peril, putting itself at serious risk of legal liability once these cases work themselves out which will not take long, given how aggressively the strong arm of government is seeking to assert itself.

Not even a week after the Supreme Court’s denial in this case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit blocked the Biden administration’s latest mandate. “Because the petitions give cause to believe there are grave statutory and constitutional issues with the Mandate, the Mandate is hereby STAYED pending further action by this court,” the per curiam (by the court) noted.

There are a lot of moving parts in this battle, so be patient and continue to pray for the judges, the justices, and the attorneys involved. The Biden mandate is to take effect on January 4, so the one thing that we can be sure of is that it will move fast.

I commend to you Justice Gorsuch’s exceptional dissent from the denial of the application for injunctive relief against Maine’s vaccine mandate which demonstrates why we can be confident that religious liberty will win. The government must treat religious exceptions on the same level as any other exemptions. They cannot target religious exemptions as less worthy of protection. “Maine has so far failed to present any evidence,” wrote Justice Gorsuch, “that granting religious exemptions to the applicants would threaten its stated public health interests any more than its medical exemption already does.”

He concluded:

Where many other States have adopted religious exemptions, Maine has charted a different course. There, healthcare workers who have served on the front line of a pandemic for the last 18 months are now being fired and their practices shuttered. All for adhering to their constitutionally protected religious beliefs. Their plight is worthy of our attention.

Indeed. This is why the Court will have to address the issue in the not too distant future. Continue to pray.

Expose the Darkness

By | LBB, Virginia | No Comments

My heart breaks for Scott Smith, the Louden County, Virginia dad whose daughter was raped in a school bathroom by a boy in a skirt, being arrested while protesting at a school board meeting.

He was mercilessly arrested and bloodied up in the process for defending his daughter. I cannot hold back the tears thinking of how he must have felt.

The school district’s superintendent Scott Ziegler claimed that there had been no assault in a school restroom anywhere in Louden County. The dad was painted as a liar and a right-wing extremist as he got agitated.

Based partly on Mr. Smith’s example, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) wrote a letter to President Joe Biden asking him to use the Patriot Act to crack down on these out-of-control parents. They wrote:

“As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

Think about that. You are out there fighting for justice for your daughter, and instead, you get labeled a domestic terrorist.

Five days later, the Biden Administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ), led by Attorney General (AG) Merrick Garland, took immediate action against parents based on the NSBA letter alone. AG Garland sent a memo saying, “While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views.” The memo directed the Federal Bureau of Investigation (yes, the FBI) to go after these parents.

Again, DOJ and the FBI were not to focus on protecting Mr. Smith and his daughter; they were to work to suppress Mr. Smith’s efforts to protect his daughter.

But their evil scheme has blown up in their faces. Reports have surfaced of how the school board knew of Mr. Smith’s daughter’s assault, and they concealed it to protect their hideous transgender bathroom policy. They were so negligent that they actually transferred the “transgender,” biological male boy to another school where he assaulted another young woman. A criminal investigation is underway.

The backlash has been so intense that the NSBA has disavowed its letter comparing parents to terrorists, while many of its state members resigned in condemnation.

But the battle is far from over. Believe it or not, AG Garland has yet to renounce his shameful memorandum.

Please pray for this father and against these evil school board policies.

And speak up against it. Ephesians 5:11 says, “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.” To do one part of the verse is not enough. We cannot simply take no part in the works of darkness; we must also expose them. We cannot remain silent.

Praying for the Body of Christ in Afghanistan

By | International, LBB, Legal, News and Events | No Comments

I want to appeal to you, as the news cycle conveniently shifts from crisis to crisis, sparing bad actors of proper accountability, to remember our brothers and sisters trapped in Afghanistan under the terrible, evil rulership of the Taliban.

You might have heard that Glenn Beck, through his Nazarene Fund, was helping to get thousands of Christians out of the country very successfully. Until the U.S. Government got wind of it, that is. Here is what he told Tucker Carlson in a recent interview:

“The State Department has blocked us every step of the way. The State Department and the White House have been the biggest problem.  Everyone else, everyone else, has been working together, putting aside differences, and trying to get these people to safety.  The State Department and the White House have blocked us every single step of the way. In fact, an ambassador was called in Macedonia last night and told not to accept any of these people, as we were trying to get them off the tarmac here to keep the airport flowing and getting these Christians out.  We haven’t really been able to move anybody for about twelve hours. Our mission is now changing greatly. We have to send people into even greater danger to try to smuggle these Christians out, who are marked not just for death, but to be set on fire alive because they’re converted Christians.”

This is the reality for Christians in Afghanistan. And our government, as you heard, shows no sympathy to them as a group. We must pray. We cannot forget that we are one body in our Lord, Jesus Christ. When they suffer, we suffer…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

Do You Know Who is Teaching Your Children?

By | Defense of Family, LBB, News and Events | No Comments

America is changing. Perhaps you have noticed. Our cities, our communities, our schools do not reflect American values, let alone Christian ones. We must begin to pay attention to who is teaching our children if we have ordinarily not paid attention in the past. A series of recent exposures have put an exclamation point to the urgency of this development.

Meet Kristin Pitzen, English teacher at Back Bay High School in Costa Mesa, Orange County, California. Ms. Pitzen proudly posted the video on one of her social media accounts (now deleted), saying this:

“Okay, so during third period, we have announcements, and they do the pledge of allegiance. I always tell my class, ‘Stand if you feel like it; don’t stand if you feel like it. Say the words if you; [sic] don’t have to say the words.’ So, my class decided to stand but not say the words. Totally fine. [Grin] Except for the fact that my room does not have a flag. It used to be there [points toward a wall]. [More grinning] But I took it down during COVID because [whispers] it made me uncomfortable. And, ugh, I packed it away, and I don’t know where [more grinning] and I haven’t found it yet [laugh]. But my kid today goes, ‘Hey, it’s kind of weird that we just stand and, you know, we say it to nothing.’ And I’m like, ‘Oh, well, you know [sarcastically] I gotta find it. Like, I’m working on it. I got you.’ [Shaking head mocking the kid that she is deceiving while laughing hysterically] ‘In the meantime,’ I tell this kid, ‘We do have a flag in the class that you can pledge your allegiance to.’ And he, like, looks around and goes, ‘Oh, that one?’ [pointing at a big LGBTTQQIAAP (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, ally, pansexual) flag the teacher is proudly displaying for the class].”

She could not stop laughing…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

What did the Supreme Court Do in the Challenge Against Texas Heartbeat Law?

By | LBB, Legal, News and Events, Sanctity of Life, SCOTUS, Texas | No Comments

The radical left and its media enablers are going berserk over the United States Supreme Court’s denial of an application for injunctive relief to stop Texas’s Heartbeat Law from going into effect. The Court simply refused to act in an activist manner and allowed the process to work as it was constitutionally envisioned.

Anyone seeking the Court to take such an extreme action that would frustrate the democratic process in this manner needs a “strong showing” that they are “likely to succeed on the merits” of the case. The pro-abortion side failed to meet that heavy burden.

Though they are fixated on Roe v. Wade, this case presents “complex and novel antecedent procedural questions on which they have not carried their burden.”

To put it simply, the Texas law is not being enforced by state officials, which the pro-abortion side is used to suing in their official capacity, given the fact that they are usually charged with enforcing the law. Not here. This law does not charge any agency or official with its enforcement. Instead, it gives private citizens the right to sue if the law is violated in the future.

The Court then, making no judgment on merits of the case, has refused to enjoin the law (meaning stopping it from going into effect) until there is an actual case or controversy with a proper defendant in order for the courts to assess it in the proper context.

The Court concluded: “This order is not based on any conclusion about the constitutionality of Texas’s law, and in no way limits other procedurally proper challenges to the Texas law, including in Texas state courts.”

Such limited action shows the Court is acting under the sort of judicial restraint envisioned by the constitutional structure, instead of as a super legislature constantly interfering and frustrating the democratic process.

It is discouraging that Chief Justice Roberts joined Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan to dissent from the decision. The Chief Justice recognizes the complex nature of the procedural question presented, saying, “We are at this point asked to resolve these novel questions—at least preliminarily—in the first instance, in the course of two days, without the benefit of consideration by the District Court or Court of Appeals.” But he would actually enjoin the law, frustrating the will of the millions of Texans who helped enact it.  This fits a pattern we have seen from the Chief Justice before, where he seems to worry about public opinion in an unhealthy way, taking steps in every major case to protect what he perceives as the “legitimacy” and independence of the Court.

Not surprisingly, the liberal side of the Court, Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, wrote separately, eager to project that they are ready to act on behalf of the pro-abortion side. No need for them to worry about the legitimacy of the Court. That seems to always cut one way.

We are thankful for Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett for their unwavering commitment to the law and showing the proper judicial restraint in such a politically charged area of law. That’s where it counts.

A Prayer for Afghanistan

By | LBB, News and Events, Prayer | No Comments

LORD,

Words fail to express the sorrow
Of the Body of Christ here in America
As we consider the fate
Of our brothers and sisters in Afghanistan.

The images are just heartbreaking.
The stories, agonizing.
We grieve for those in such perilous situations
Wondering what awaits their families.

Help! Lord.
We humbly ask for Your guidance
For our leaders and those with the
Power and means to come to their aid.

We consider, and plead especially,
For the women and children who are
Specifically targeted by the evil rule
Of the Taliban. Rise against it, Lord.

Stretch out Your mighty hand
And show Your awesome power
For all the world to see that
You are God!

Frustrate the enemy’s plans at every turn.
Let those uncommitted to freedom and liberty
Among our leaders in Washington be exposed,
Let them be removed from their posts.

Let the righteous rule again
That the people may rejoice,
As Your Word says, Lord.
And strengthen the knees of Your Church.

Give us faith to engage the spiritual fight
We so often overlook.
Give us spiritual eyes and help us
To pray fervently in the power of the Spirit.

Hear the plight of those who,
In their distress, cry out to You.
Deliver them and protect them.
Let Your wisdom increase in Afghanistan.

May the threat of persecution
Be a catalyst for Your Word to flourish,
For Your church to do as our Lord and Savior did,
To give our very lives for love.

Teach us to love, Father.
Teach us to have compassion—
To be moved as Jesus when He saw the crowds,
And give us the faith to multiply the loaves and the fish.

For what is impossible with men,
It is possible with God.
We know this to be true, Lord,
And we declare it anew.

We believe.
We believe in You, our Father.
We believe in Your Son, Jesus, in whose name we pray.
We believe in Your Holy Spirit, through whom we pray.

Amen.

Standing for the Logos

By | Defense of Family, LBB, News and Events | No Comments

You will find one of the most stunning mysteries of life in John 1:14. Καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο, in the original Greek, the Apostle John reveals to us in the most beautiful language that, “The Word,” the Logos, “became flesh.” He is speaking of Christ, of course, but as the Logos? Yes.

God spoke, and it was created (Genesis 1). What else would He speak but “logos.” After creating man, God could have related to us in any number of ways, but again He chooses the word—the logos. Rational thoughts and ideas, blessings and warnings, come to us through words with specific meanings. Yes, even in the beginning, it was understood.

The fall of man comes through the serpent’s word games. “Did God really say?” it asked Eve (Genesis 3:1). God communicates His covenant through words. He gave us prophets to announce and pray, yes, with words.

Even after Christ, Christians are to herald the good news (the Gospel) by using the miracle of God’s Word (the Bible) to tell the story of redemption. “How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?” asked the Apostle Paul (Romans 10:14).

Looking at all this, one might begin to think that words (the logos) matter.

Which brings us to the problem of this present age…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

Get ‘Em While They’re Young

By | Defense of Family, LBB, News and Events | No Comments

The most innocuous category of our useless TV ratings system is TV-Y. According to the parental guidelines, it signifies content that is suitable for preschool children (2-6). This is such a formative, innocent age that even children’s networks have developed a junior version (i.e., Nick Jr., Disney Junior) to target these little ones.

Some popular shows have followed suit, developing toddler versions of their shows, specifically targeted to this age group. For example, Disney Junior has developed “Muppet Babies.” Just one look at the baby versions of the classic characters like Miss Piggy, Kermit the Frog, and Gonzo puts a smile on your face.

But I hope by now you know that you cannot entrust your children to the culture. I spoke to NTD News recently about San Francisco’s Gay Men’s Chorus coming out publicly with a song proclaiming they want to “convert our children.”

Please note, you cannot trust the TV ratings either. The Muppet Babies’ latest episode introduces your preschooler to the first transgender princess.  Season 3, Episode 19, titled “Gonzo-rella / Summer’s Car Trouble,” just as it sounds, plays on the old story of Cinderella, but now featuring the beloved Gonzo character…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

The Spiritual War Against Children

By | Culture, LBB, Legal, News and Events, Sex Trafficking / Pornography, Sexual Exploitation, Substack | No Comments

I have pleaded with you before to realize that secular humanists are systematically targeting our children for indoctrination. A recent op-ed titled “Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it.” in one of our nation’s most prestigious newspapers, The Washington Post, helps stress the urgency of the call to stand up and fight for your children.

Though The Post makes the headline personal to make the writer Lauren Rowello’s message more palatable, her call is collective. She is pushing community standards. It’s not that she wants her kids to see sexual deviant behavior (she will make sure of that); she wants your kids to see it. That is why she is writing publicly, advocating for the behavior to be kept in full public display of children—again, they are the target.

She is not urging this wickedness for herself or even as the “self-expression” of those involved, but for the great “benefit” of corrupting children’s minds.

To their shame, The Washington Post, gives her a platform to expand her reach. The author writes, “Children who witness kink culture are reassured that alternative experiences of sexuality and expression are valid — no matter who they become as they mature, helping them recognize that their personal experiences aren’t bad or wrong, and that they aren’t alone in their experiences.”

Your child needs this, you see. That is why Pride parades must be celebrated in public on the busiest streets of the most dynamic of towns. And the more sexually deviant behaviors they showcase, the better…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

For America (Day 123)

By | LBB, News and Events, Prayer | No Comments

In our distress we cry out to You, Lord,
For You hear our prayers.
We stand at the door and knock,
Confident that You will open.

Not to excuse our unfaithfulness,
But to receive us in Your grace
Upon the confession of our sin,
Bidding us to turn from our wicked ways.

We extol You for your goodness and patience.
Our hearts burst with the songs of thanksgiving!
Give us understanding, Father, give us wisdom,
According to Your Word, generously and without reproach.

Restore in us the spiritual tastebuds that
Appreciate the sweetness of Your statutes.
All Your commandments are righteous and good.
They bring life. Peace and joy are its fruit.

May Your hand become our help and rest,
We choose to trust in You, instead of our frantic work.
Help our fellow countryman to value Your ways,
Grant us to see, collectively, that there is no other way.

That Your Law may be our delight is our plight.
For we all as sheep have gone astray;
We know we have lost our way,
And turn to You, Good Shepherd, to guide us again.

Your ways alone are just.
We pray against those who promise
The sort of justice that enslaves,
We pray their self-aggrandizing schemes fail.

We pray for those who get caught up in their ways.
Have mercy, O God, and help us to be there,
Once the deceivers find no use for them and abandons them,
Let Your body delight in that restorative work.

For we are not without hope.
None are beyond Your Love, O God.
There is power in Your Word,
There is power in the blood.

You’ve done it in our lives,
Throughout the ages You have been glorified.
Continue Your work, LORD, in our land.
Glory to God, now and forevermore!

Freedom Rings Again in Philadelphia with Big First Amendment Win at U.S. Supreme Court

By | LBB, Legal, News and Events, Press Releases, Religious Issues, SCOTUS | No Comments

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 17, 2021

Contact:
Jacklyn Washington
202-748-3501, [email protected]

Freedom Rings Again in Philadelphia with Big First Amendment Win at U.S. Supreme Court

Washington, D.C. – Conservative women celebrate the just-released U.S. Supreme Court decision in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. Penny Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), the largest public policy organization for women in the nation, had this to say:

“As the Court acknowledged, ‘The refusal of Philadelphia to contract with [Catholic Social Services] CSS for the provision of foster care services unless CSS agrees to certify same-sex couples as foster parents violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.’

“This is a commonsense decision that represents the most basic principles of freedom. Americans should be free to act upon matters of conscience according to their deeply held religious beliefs without fear of government retribution. 

“Children are the real winners here. Children in foster care or in need of a forever home have benefitted from religious communities, like Catholic Social Services, selflessly committed to their welfare for thousands of years. Government should welcome such humble assistance and encourage their expansion, instead of putting a target on them seeking their demise, as Philadelphia tried to do here.

“In a pluralistic society, we must resist those in power who seek to impose their preferred views in matters of faith by force. We must learn to respect one another and understand that disagreement is not bigotry. 

“Today, the Court lives up to the promise of our founding and adheres to the essence of our First Amendment freedoms to the free exercise of religion.”

###

Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC) is the legislation and advocacy arm of Concerned Women for America. Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization with a rich 40-year history of helping our members across the country bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy.

I’ve Turned into My Old Preacher

By | Defense of Family, LBB, News and Events | No Comments

In my inaugural Substack exclusive, I wrote to you about the strategic targeting of our children by secularist humanists intent on capturing and manipulating their minds and emotions before they are developed enough to make wise decisions.

It is unmistakable what is happening; the examples are innumerable. Nickelodeon, not content with its Blue’s Clues Pride efforts, put out a video explaining the meaning of the pride flag featuring Drag Queen Nina West (yes, the real-life character depicted in the preschoolers’ cartoon). The video’s description encourages children to “celebrate by lifting up voices in the LGBTQIA+ community!”

I bet most of you had not heard of the subtle addition of “IA” to the “LGBTQ+” term. Your children probably had not heard of it either. But fear not, thanks to Nickelodeon, they are sure to Google the term so that they can learn all about it. The first “resource” they get from Google will take them to the OutRight Action International website, where they can learn about another 30 plus terms related to sexual preferences. Other organizations prominently featured by Google on such a search include the Human Rights Campaign, PFLAG, GLSEN, and Lambda Legal. I’ll save you the pain of having to read their propaganda and tell you that the “I” stands for intersex, and the “A” stands for asexual, among other things…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

Children on the Brink

By | Defense of Family, LBB, News and Events, Sexual Exploitation | No Comments

In the paragraphs that follow, I attempt the impossible. Few achieve the magical task of putting into words the unspeakable fidgeting of the heart. It is a dangerous business to engage oneself, especially on matters where the cultural meets the spiritual. But it is a necessary work, for it is the work of universal truth—the work of freedom.

Millions feel the truth. But that is not enough. We must know the truth. It is that which sets us free.

The truth we must face today is that our children are being systematically targeted by secular humanists who are enemies of God and His Word. They do not want to “live and let live.” They want your children. They want you isolated. They want to dismantle in your children’s minds all notions of truth, especially those Scriptural truths you have taught to them.

Don’t know how that works? What does the rainbow symbolize for your children?

As they wake up in the morning, they’ll have their Kellogg’s cereal telling them to roleplay, choosing their preferred pronouns. Next, perhaps they want to watch some cartoons in the morning, as we all did growing up, and they have “Blue’s Clues Pride Parade Sing-Along with Drag Star Nina West Celebrating LGBTQ Families.”

There they learn about families that have “two daddies,” “babas [that] are nonbinary,” “trans members,” and even about “ace, bi, and pan grown-ups,” all “allies to the queer community.”

A friend commented she had to look up some of the terms. And guess what, many children will too. They will learn a lot more than what’s on one episode, thanks to that cute blue dog.

But your children don’t watch that; they watch Disney Plus. Or maybe they are older now and just like going to Target or Walmart where they’ll be presented with beautiful displays of LGBTQ+ affirming merchandise and messages, like the asexual or non-binary flag pride t-shirt or the “trans rights are human rights” one.

All these messages being pushed upon our children are guaranteed to have an effect. Our children will “google” these terms and find out more. They will consider them…

Click here to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive Substack column. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!

For America (Day 121) – A Memorial Day Prayer

By | LBB, News and Events, Prayer | No Comments

Father in Heaven, all glory to You,
Who sent Your Son, Jesus, to die in our stead,
All glory for that sacrifice,
Which opened the way.

It is a reminder, especially today,
That we are to do the same.
And many have indeed given themselves
For their fellow men.

This Memorial Day, Lord,
We want to remember them.
We pray for their families and friends,
Protect them—bless them in every way.

It is a hard road, full of incredible sacrifice,
To give your life to defend a nation such as ours.
To him who much is given, much is required,
And You have given us much.

So, we understand the role we play in the world,
We accept the responsibility that has brought.
We only beg Your leading, even beyond,
What we think best.

Help us to never forget these who fought and bled,
Who experience the trauma of war, and yet
Endured for freedom’s sake
For liberty, for family, for peace in the world.

Help us to not use our freedom to indulge the flesh,
Instead teach us to love each other,
To forgive and strive to see the best
In each other and in the country they served.

Help us to hold on to unity in truth.
As we celebrate this day, help us to reflect,
On the innumerable blessings You gave,
And continues to place on our people and our land.

Keep us safe,
Keep us strong in Your Word,
Trusting in You and You Alone,
In Jesus’ name Amen.