On Valentine’s Day, Penny Nance, President and CEO of Concerned Women for America, joined Students for Life and Heritage Action at the Standing for You press conference to speak out about the pro-life movement’s work to love both the woman and unborn child in a crisis pregnancy.
Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee sent a letter to the U.S. Senate noting our intent to score against the confirmation of Dr. Robert Califf to be Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.
“Dr. Califf, previously FDA Commissioner under President Barack Obama, has a troubling record of corrupting data to appease the abortion industry at the expense of vulnerable women’s health and safety. He cannot be trusted to conduct proper oversight of our nation’s pharmaceuticals and is therefore unfit to serve a second term. CWALAC will score against Dr. Califf’s confirmation and include this vote in our annual scorecard.”
Read the full letter HERE.
Are you a parent in need of good parenting resources or pregnant with questions in need of answers? Concerned Women for America recommends these helpful informational resources for pregnancy and parenting.
Thank you for reading. Throughout the Indefensible Roe series, we have explored how the infamous Roe v. Wade decision that opened the door to the more than 62 million babies killed in abortion in the U.S. since 1973 has no basis to stand on today as the Supreme Court reexamines its validity in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The Supreme Court’s meddling in abortion policy has been a complete failure—a betrayal of the most fundamental principles of liberty. We have discussed how Roe and its supporting cases are indefensible legally, as a matter of policy, scientifically, and today we explore perhaps its most tragic failure: the spiritual one.
Though some may be tempted to dismiss this aspect of the discussion as somehow outside the bounds of the legal/policy discussion, I submit to you that the injustice of abortion strikes at the heart of the legal case. As Aquinas put it, an unjust law is no law at all, but a sort of violence:
Human law is law only by virtue of its accordance with right reason; and thus it is manifest that it flows from the eternal law. And in so far as it deviates from right reason it is called an unjust law; in such case it is no law at all, but rather a species of violence. (Summa Theologiae, Ia-Ilae, q. xciii, art. 3, ad 2m.)
Further, the social consequences of the spiritual atrophy our country has suffered in the last 50 years, following the selfish, deathly path of abortion, have brought our country to the brink of self-destruction.
Look around. We are not a healthy nation.
By Alivia Grace Talley, YWA Ambassador and Vice President at Clemson University
“I don’t think my life is valuable, or any life. Let alone a baby’s life. I just don’t think anyone’s life has value.”
She looked into my eyes as she spoke, and my heart stopped. At that moment, it felt as if everything around me suddenly slowed down. No longer was I just pro-life tabling on my college campus. At this moment, I was talking with a student about the most important truth we should all know – how much worth and value we each have.
To any pro-abortion student I get to speak with on my campus, I want them to know that all life is valuable – especially their life.
I have experienced so much from pro-life tabling on my campus. Some students want to stop and talk about the issue of abortion, and others want to stop and yell at me for “telling women what to do with their bodies.”
It is vital that young women know they are worth so much more than what abortion has to offer. According to the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, 42% of abortion-minded women are between the ages of 18 and 24. This means women on my campus believe the vicious lies of the abortion industry.
The abortion industry tells women they cannot graduate from school, have their baby, and have a career. They trick women into believing that the only solution to an unexpected pregnancy is to end the lives of their unborn children. However, we know this is not the truth. Thousands of pregnancy centers, all across America, exist to empower women to graduate, achieve their dreams, and have their babies.
Through pro-life tabling, I have had the opportunity to see so many hearts and minds change on abortion. One young woman shared with me that she had an abortion in her past, and I was able to provide resources to help her find hope and healing.
Ultimately, women who choose abortion do not know the significant value they have by simply being the daughter of our Heavenly Father. Before the moment you and I were created, each of us was chosen by the Creator of the Heavens and Earth Himself. Our Heavenly Father wanted to spend forever with us so much that He went to the very ends of the earth to call each of us His Sons and Daughters. 1 Peter 2:9 says this about who we are as God’s beloved children: “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.” Because of this truth, we do not have to question if we are loved, known, or wanted.
The day a student shared with me that she believed no one’s life had value, my heart broke for her. I told her that she did have worth, and her life had value. She shared with me that I was the first person to tell her that. Now, whenever I speak with pro-abortion students, I always keep that at the front of my mind. I tell myself, “The young women who are yelling at me just don’t know how much they are worth. The people I know from high school who are walking by this table and laughing at me just don’t know how much they are worth.”
To any pro-life college student reading this: pray for students on your campus. Talk to students on your campus. Tell them they are chosen and that their life has worth and value. It might be awkward at first or seem different, but as daughters of the Lord, we’re supposed to be different in the world’s eyes. I’ve learned that it really doesn’t matter what others think or say about me because I don’t take that to heaven. I take with me the souls and hearts I help lead to the Lord.
In the fight for life, remember who you are as His beloved daughter. And share that truth with others. As you talk to abortion supporters on your campus, tell them that babies’ lives are valuable, and their lives are, too.
You’ll be surprised. You never know who God will send onto your path. Right at this very moment, you might be sitting beside someone who just has no idea how valuable and worthy their life is.
Michael Bloomberg, the self-proclaimed defender of “women’s rights” has a well-documented paper trail of treating women as chattel. Doreen Denny, Concerned Women for America’s Senior Advisor, discusses how men like Bloomberg championing abortion have one goal in mind. And it’s not advancing women.
Read Doreen’s opinion piece in The Christian Post.
Concerned Women for America’s CEO and President, Penny Nance, joined OAN’s In Focus with Stephanie Hammill to discuss last week’s March for Life and the pro-life movement’s optimism surrounding the historic Dobbs case. Listen to the full interview below to hear about this year’s March and what the future of abortion in America could look like.
Penny Nance spoke with CNS News Reporter at the March for life on her experience at the March and the upcoming Dobbs decision. Listen to her full remarks here.
Penny Nance was quoted in Townhall commenting on the hope the pro-life movement has at the March for Life and surrounding the upcoming Dobbs decision. Read the full article here.
Today, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (HELP) is set to vote on President Biden’s nominee for Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Dr. Robert Califf. Califf is a self-proclaimed ardent believer in data and a renowned figure in biomedical science. The average American would logically assume that such a person could be entrusted to protect the health and safety of our nation. The problem is, Califf, who previously served as FDA commissioner under President Obama from February 2016 to January 2017, has a troubling record of corrupting data to prioritize partisan interests over the health and safety of vulnerable women when it comes to abortion.
Until 2016, the REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies) for chemical abortion required the reporting of severe, life-threatening, and fatal adverse events. Under Califf’s esteemed leadership and direction, this requirement was altered so that only deaths be reported. Following this decision, 75 members of Congress sent a bipartisan letter highlighting concerns and requesting comprehensive metrics on the dangers of the abortion pill, mifepristone. Califf never responded. One could cynically assume it is because he knows the danger at hand.
It’s no secret that chemical abortions are dangerous. The Charlotte Lozier Institute found that chemical abortions, which now comprise roughly 44% of all abortions, significantly increase the risk of an emergency room visit, and over 60% of abortion-related ER visits following a chemical abortion were miscoded as a treatment for a miscarriage. The FDA’s December 16 decision to permanently allow this lethal pill to be distributed via mail is astounding given the risk of hemorrhaging, undetected ectopic pregnancies, and more.
Although the FDA’s job is to ensure the efficacy of drugs for all Americans, its safety claims lack any semblance of credibility, as the agency ignores flawed data and fails to strengthen weak reporting requirements. A report published earlier this year on the FDA’s data on deaths and injuries related to the chemical abortion pill, found incomplete data including 500 “uncodable” events. Complete gaps in critical health information are unacceptable especially for a federal entity trusted with oversight of our “health and safety.” Califf perpetuated this issue during his first stint atop the FDA, and we should not blindly grant him another term.
Many Senators seemingly turned a blind eye during his confirmation hearings last month, as Califf garnered “bipartisan” support from members of the committee. When the topic of chemical abortion was raised, Califf promised the committee that the agency’s decisions would always be grounded in the latest and greatest data. This statement would be more comforting if the current data was not marred by Califf’s own incompetency and lack of discernment during his Obama years.
All of this does not even consider Califf’s ties to pharma. After leaving his first term as FDA Commissioner in 2017, Califf went to work as a consultant and board member for numerous health industry companies such as Cytokinetics, Bitterroot Bio, Centessa Pharmaceuticals, and Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals. He possesses millions of dollars’ worth of pharmaceutical company stocks. This should raise red flags everywhere. The conflict of interest alone should disqualify him for the job, and if that somehow wasn’t enough, his horrible track record of hindering data to appease the abortion industry at the expense of our health and safety should sound alarms everywhere. His claim to follow the data would be laughable if it was not a clear insult, and my organization, Concerned Women for America is urging the members of the Senate HELP committee to vote against Califf’s nomination. Robert Califf is unfit to lead the FDA. Another Term as FDA commissioner would be detrimental to all Americans, especially women and unborn children.
Concerned Women for America
Six Month Spiritual Engagement for Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health
The December 1 oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health were just the beginning of our pro-life efforts for this case. If the Court keeps to its historical track record of rendering decisions on “controversial” cases in the last weeks of its term, the Dobbs decision will likely be announced by the end of June.
Until the Supreme Court renders its decision, our posture must be on our knees before the Lord. CWA is encouraging our leaders, members, and friends across the country to set aside the fourth Monday of the next six months, beginning January 24, for focused prayer on the Dobbs case. Using the 30 Days of Prayer for Life prayer booklet and our monthly prayer points listed below, we encourage you to gather together people to pray in person, over the phone, or via Zoom.
Monday, January 24, 2022
Using the 30 Days of Prayer for Life booklet, read silently or aloud prayers 1, 2, 13, 14, and 15.
Strategic Prayer Points:
- Pray that the March for Life, held on January 21 in Washington, D.C., had a great spiritual impact on the Justices and their law clerks as they continue to study and prepare their opinions for the Dobbs vs Jackson case.
- Pray for the media, that they will see the importance of the March for Life in light of the Dobbs case and choose to report on the march and the case both fairly and accurately.
- Pray that the decision of the Dobbs case will end the federal scourge of abortion on our nation.
February – June prayer points will be listed soon.
Do not believe your lying eyes.
This (pictured above) is not a baby. No sir.
If it were a person, then the Supreme Court itself admitted in Roe they would not have made the decision they made to allow her to be crushed and sucked out of her mother’s womb.
It is actually a good thing they didn’t have such confusing pictures back then. In 1973, when Roe was decided, they thought a baby at 15 weeks, as is at issue in the Mississippi law being challenged in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, looked like this:
Much easier to declare that this is some sort of tissue, part of a woman’s body, instead of a baby deserving of love and care. That is why the pro-abortion side in Dobbs wants the justices to keep women back in 1973. Nothing has changed, they argued on the day of oral arguments…
<em><a href=”https://mariodiaz.substack.com/p/indefensible-roe-the-scientific-track”>Click here</a> to read the rest of Mario’s exclusive <a href=”https://mariodiaz.substack.com/”>Substack column</a>. And be sure to subscribe below to never miss one of his posts again!</em>
<center><iframe style=”border: 1px solid #EEE; background: white;” src=”https://mariodiaz.substack.com/embed” width=”480″ height=”320″ frameborder=”0″ scrolling=”no”></iframe></center>
The Food and Drug Administration has decided to remove safeguards surrounding the abortion pill – such as allowing it to be sent through the mail without the supervision of a doctor. Concerned Women for America’s Legislative Strategist, Ashley Foster, joined John Bachman Now on Newsmax to unpack the decision.
Today, the FDA announced its permanent removal of the “in-person dispensing requirement” for Mifepristone. This makes the abortion pill readily available through mail and telehealth services without the supervision of a physician. Research has shown chemical abortion has a four times higher rate of complication than surgical abortion.
Concerned Women for America CEO and President Penny Nance said:
“The FDA’s decision to permanently remove the in-person dispensing requirement for Mifepristone will senselessly jeopardize lives. Shamefully deemed a means to ‘minimize the burden on the health care delivery system,’ this change is nothing more than a political plot to satiate the profit-hungry abortion industry.
“The chemical abortion pill significantly increases the rate of hospitalization for vulnerable women who truly need conscientious care and counsel, not a reckless, mail-order fix. The FDA’s new requirement that any pharmacy dispensing be specially certified is ludicrous and a cheap concession that will do nothing to protect women’s health and safety. This dangerous pill has no place in our healthcare market. We urge the FDA to reverse course.”
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.
Mario Diaz, Esq., CWA’s General Counsel, joined NPR’s Morning Edition with Noel King to discuss the future of Roe v. Wade following the historic Supreme Court oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
12.1.21: A day to remember. Concerned Women for America was proud to help bring thousands of activists and college students from all over the country to Washington, D.C., to pray on the steps of the Supreme Court today while the Justices heard oral arguments in the biggest abortion case of our lifetime.
While we have a few months to wait until the final decision that could end the culture of abortion in America, we are so encouraged by the passion of the prayer warriors who stepped up to defend the least of these.
Click below to watch our CEO and President Penny Nance’s full remarks from the rally.
Today, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the most important pro-life case of our lifetime: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. As hundreds of pro-life supporters rallied outside the courtroom (outnumbering the other side by a considerable margin!), inside the Justices heard arguments from the state of Mississippi, the Jackson abortion clinic, and the United States Solicitor General.
Here are the top three takeaways:
1- Institutional Legitimacy was the Liberal Side’s Theme
Justice Stephen Brayer led the charge for the liberal side of the Court on this point. He quoted Casey and argued that to overturn Roe and Casey “Would subvert the Court’s legitimacy.” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who blatantly and embarrassingly acted as an advocate for the pro-choice side instead of a justice of the Supreme Court, suggested the Court would not survive “the stench” of overturning Roe.
She’s obviously grown used to the fetor of more than 60 million babies aborted since 1973.
In the liberal side’s warped view, to overturn Roe would be a political action, but to impose abortion on demand on all Americans was not. They kept expressing concerns over the politicization of the Court as if it were not seen as activist in favor of abortion right now.
Mississippi’s State Solicitor General Scott Grant Stewart made clear that Roe and Casey had no grounding in the constitutional text and that the continued upholding of erroneous precedent is in fact more of a threat to the Court’s legitimacy…