The Scottsdale-based Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) secured a federal court ruling that effectively halts mail-order abortions.
On Wednesday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) must reinstate its safety restrictions for mifepristone use. In effect, the ruling limits mifepristone’s use to the first seven weeks of pregnancy, as well as requires an in-person visit with a provider prior to prescription.
This is the Texas court’s second ruling against mifepristone access. In April, the court issued an injunction against the abortion drug. The same hour of that injunction, a Washington federal court ruled that the FDA must continue providing mifepristone. Several weeks after those conflicting orders, the Supreme Court halted the Texas court’s injunction until all litigation had concluded.
BREAKING🚨 The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled the FDA must do its job and restore crucial safeguards around chemical abortion drugs, including ending illegal mail-order abortions. It's a significant victory for the doctors we represent, and for women's health and safety.
ADF sued the FDA last November on behalf of four pro-life medical groups, who argued that mifepristone shouldn’t have been approved by the FDA over 20 years ago and should be removed from the market.
The FDA approved mifepristone in 2000, during the Clinton administration, using a fast-tracked approval process. The FDA justified approval by reclassifying abortion as a “serious or life-threatening illness” and mifepristone as a “meaningful therapeutic benefit.” In a 2008 report, the Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) noted the medical community’s widespread criticism of the basis for mifepristone’s approval.
“Critics have argued that unwanted pregnancy should not be considered a serious or life-threatening illness,” stated the GAO report.
Mifepristone’s efficacy and safety are dubious. The drug’s usage has been linked to hundreds of cases of infections and death, if not more. Government studies have estimated adverse effects of the drug occurring in as many as one in five women. The FDA also failed to convince the New Orleans court of the drug’s safety.
“[I]n loosening mifepristone’s safety restrictions, [the] FDA failed to address several important concerns about whether the drug would be safe for the women who use it,” read the majority opinion.
Yet, state leaders have advocated for access to the abortion drug. Attorney General Kris Mayes’ office claims the drug is “incredibly safe” and that restrictions on it are “unnecessary.”
In June, Hobbs issued an executive order usurping county attorneys’ authority over prosecuting abortion law violations.
In March, Mayes encouraged pharmacies to give out abortion pills. In May, Mayes joined an amicus brief to advocate for the upholding of mifepristone’s FDA approval.
Hours after the circuit court ruling, Mayes’ new Reproductive Rights Unit issued guidance on how individuals can hide their data, such as internet history and communications, when seeking abortions. The new unit is headed by deputy solicitor general Hayleigh Crawford.
The attorney general didn’t issue a direct response to this week’s ruling, but the data privacy guidance and corresponding meeting appeared to be an indirect response of sorts.
Arizona stands by its reproductive health providers and those seeking care. Thank you to these stellar advocates for joining us yesterday to discuss our new data privacy guidance. Ft. @BreThomas68, @LegallyLove, Sheena Chiang, @JodiLiggett, Dr. @CadeyHarrel and Tonya Irick. pic.twitter.com/Ek8TsVDjTq
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) August 17, 2023
Featured guests at the meeting included:
Chris Love, board member and senior advisor for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, and attorney at Kewenvoyouma Law;
Sheena Chiang, co-chair of the Planned Parenthood Arizona Board of Directors, and attorney for the Maricopa County Legal Defender’s office;
Jodi Liggett, founder of the progressive think tank and advocacy group Arizona Center for Women’s Advancement, former deputy chief of staff for Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego, former vice president of external affairs and executive director for Planned Parenthood of Arizona, former senior policy advisor for Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton, former CEO of Arizona Foundation for Women, and former policy advisor for former Gov. Jane Hull;
Bré Thomas, CEO of Affirm Sexual and Reproductive Health For All, former Arizona Department of Health Services manager and senior policy advisor, former Arizona Department of Economic Security executive assistant to the deputy director, and former women’s health policy advisor for former Gov. Janet Napolitano;
Cadey Harrel, doctor and founder of Agave Community Health and Wellness;
Tonya Irick, director of abortion clinic Family Planning Associates Medical Group
We brought together health care providers, advocates & community leaders to discuss @arizonaago's new data privacy guidance for those seeking reproductive health care. In a world in which we do everything online, we leave a trail in web and app data. Privacy should be the default pic.twitter.com/pFcbpcxzJ2
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) August 17, 2023
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Scottsdale legal nonprofit Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) won a religious freedom case at the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).
SCOTUS ruled 6-3 at the end of June in 303 Creative v. Elenis against Colorado’s anti-discrimination law, Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), as unconstitutional. The law would prohibit a Christian wedding website designer from refusing to create a same-sex wedding website.
The plaintiff, Lorie Smith, holds the Christian belief that marriage exists only between one man and one woman, and contests against the possibility that she either must produce content that “contradicts Biblical truth,” such as same-sex marriages, or cease business.
Ultimately, SCOTUS determined in a majority opinion written by Justice Neil Gorsuch that Smith’s creative expression constituted speech and that CADA therefore violated the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause.
“Ms. Smith’s websites will express and communicate ideas — namely, those that ‘celebrate and promote the couple’s wedding and unique love story’ and those ‘celebrat[e] and promot[e]’ what Ms. Smith understands to be a marriage,” stated Gorsuch.
"This is a victory not just for me, but for all of us. Whether you share my beliefs or disagree with them, free speech is for everyone. And the government shouldn’t force anyone to say something they don’t believe. The Court’s decision means we are all more free today than we… pic.twitter.com/wXHqZgAWL2
— Alliance Defending Freedom (@ADFLegal) June 30, 2023
Gorsuch further criticized CADA for its fullest possible outcome: compelling speech of all manners and kinds from any commissioned person if their customer belongs to a CADA-protected class.
“Under Colorado’s logic, the government may compel anyone who speaks for pay on a given topic to accept all commissions on that same topic — no matter the message — if the topic somehow implicates a customer’s statutorily protected trait,” said Gorsuch. “Taken seriously, that principle would allow the government to force all manner of artists, speechwriters, and others whose services involve speech to speak what they do not believe on pain of penalty. The Court’s precedents recognize the First Amendment tolerates none of that.”
Smith does have LGBTQ clients; however, Smith won’t create content that runs counter to her beliefs.
After the SCOTUS ruling, ADF CEO and lead counsel Kristen Waggoner stated that differences of beliefs don’t constitute discrimination.
“Disagreement isn’t discrimination, and the government can’t mislabel speech as discrimination to censor it,” said Waggoner. “As the court highlighted, her decisions to create speech always turn on what message is requested, never on who requests it. [T]he government has never needed to compel speech to ensure access to goods and services.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has rightly reaffirmed that the government can’t force Americans to say things they don’t believe. The court reiterated that it’s unconstitutional for the state to eliminate from the public square ideas it dislikes, including the belief that marriage is the… https://t.co/9BtiPg0skn
Following the ruling, critics alleged that Smith fabricated a request for a same-sex wedding website after a news article insinuated she did. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser also derided Smith’s complaint as “a made-up case without the benefit of any real facts or customers.” ADF and Smith rejected those claims.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
A Christian university in Arizona scored a win for justice this week, ending a two-month legal battle with a local school district.
On Thursday, the Arizona-based Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) announced a settlement between Arizona Christian University (ACU) and the Washington Elementary School District. The lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, originated when the District “decided to terminate its (eleven-year) relationship with Arizona Christian and its students solely because of their religious status and beliefs on biblical marriage and sexuality.”
ACU President Len Munsil claimed victory with the settlement, saying, “This is a complete vindication of the rights of our students to be able to participate as student-teachers in a public school district without fear of religious discrimination. We obtained everything we wanted in this new agreement, without any sacrifice or compromise to our beliefs and our university’s religious purpose. We look forward to a continued beneficial partnership that serves ACU student-teachers and the students, faculty, and staff of the WESD. And we are so grateful for the team at Alliance Defending Freedom for their excellent advocacy for our religious freedoms.”
According to ADF, the “district’s board voted Wednesday night to enter a new agreement allowing ACU students to teach in the district once again” The district also paid $25,000 in attorneys’ fees. The motion to approve the settlement passed the Washington Elementary School District’s Governing Board 4-1. Members Jenni Abbott-Bayardi, Kyle Clayton, Lindsey M Peterson, and Nikkie Gomez-Whaley voted to approve, while Tamillia Valenzuela opposed this resolution.
ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of U.S. Litigation David Cortman also weighed in on the settlement, stating, “By discriminating against Arizona Christian University and denying it an opportunity to participate in the student-teacher program because of its religious status and beliefs, the school district was in blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution, not to mention state law that protects ACU’s religious freedom. At a time when a critical shortage of qualified, caring teachers exists, the Washington Elementary School District board did the right thing by prioritizing the needs of elementary school children and agreeing to partner once again with ACU’s student-teachers.”
West Valley lawmaker Anthony Kern, who had been closely following this situation from the beginning, opined on the good news for ACU, tweeting, “Good news for the Constitution and religious freedom; bad news for “Cat Ears” and the rest of the Democrats on the Washington Elementary School Board. BTW – how much do the taxpayers have to pay??”
Good news for the Constitution and religious freedom; bad news for "Cat Ears" and the rest of the Democrats on the Washington Elementary School Board.
A Christian university’s case against a Phoenix school district over alleged religious discrimination got a hearing on Tuesday.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), who filed the lawsuit on behalf of Arizona Christian University (ACU) against the Washington Elementary School District (WESD), spoke with AZ Free News after the hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction in the Arizona District Court.
ADF lawyer Jake Reed said they felt confident in their legal arguments and that the judge that heard the case, Steven Logan, was well-versed on the arguments ahead of Tuesday’s hearings. Reed said they’re hoping for a ruling within the next few weeks, considering ACU needs to place their student teachers for the upcoming year by the end of this semester.
“This is a pretty simple case about religious discrimination,” said Reed. “A public body is telling a university they can’t place their teachers because of their religious faith.”
WESD terminated its contract with ACU in February. Its governing board members cited ACU’s Christianity as a principal factor for their decision. Leading on the effort was board member Tamillia Valenzuela, who said that ACU’s Biblical perspective that traditional sexual morality and the standard of marriage between one man and one woman directly opposed her and other LGBTQ+ community members. Valenzuela received support from fellow board members Kyle Clayton and Nikki Gomez-Whaley.
“[W]hen I went and looked into not only [ACU’s] core values but then the statement of faith that they ask their students to sign and live by, what gave me pause was it’s not just teaching but it’s teaching as they say with a Biblical lens, with a proselytizing is embedded into how they teach, and you know, I just don’t believe that belongs in schools,” said Clayton. “I would never want, you know, my son to talk about his two dads and be shamed by a teacher who believed a certain way and is at a school that demands that they, you know, teach through [a] Biblical lens.”
Gomez-Whaley said she would be open to those who claimed to be Christians who were accepting of LGBTQ+ lifestyles.
“[E]ven though [ACU] may not do anything illegal where they are preaching or using Bible verses, I do believe that we owe it to especially all of our students when we’re working in equity but especially our LGBTQ students and staff who are under fire who are not protected, and who we have already pledged to support,” said Gomez-Whaley. “We cannot continue to align ourselves with organizations that starkly contrast our values and say that we legitimately care about diversity, equity, and inclusion and that we legitimately care about all of our families.”
Reed shared that in the 11 years of WESD and ACU’s relationship, there were well over 100 students placed as either student teachers or in teacher shadowing positions. Of those students, 17 went on to be hired by WESD.
When asked whether WESD could attempt religious discrimination in future contracting decisions under the guise of other reasons, Reed said that those incidents, if they were to occur, would have to be scrutinized.
“The government can’t treat certain people worse than everyone else. Students shouldn’t be denied opportunities because of their religious beliefs,” said Reed. “The government can’t pick and choose what beliefs they allow.”
WESD proposed to settle by extending a separate agreement with ACU for one more year — but not the agreement at issue.
Ahead of the hearing the judge denied an amicus brief filed last week by The Goldwater Institute, a public policy research and litigation organization. Logan stated in his order that the WESD didn’t consent to the brief and that the Goldwater Institute didn’t present relevant matters that hadn’t already or couldn’t be brought to the court by either party.
“The parties’ briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction is complete, thorough, and more than sufficient for this Court to make a ruling,” wrote Logan.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Goldwater Institute announced on Tuesday that they submitted a supportive brief in a lawsuit accusing Washington Elementary School District (WESD) of discriminating against Christians.
WESD decided to end its contract with Arizona Christian University (ACU) earlier this year over the school’s religious beliefs. The lawsuit was filed initially by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) on behalf of ACU early last month.
WESD is the largest elementary school district in the state, and had partnered with ACU for 11 years without issue, according to court documents.
In their press release, the Goldwater Institute claimed that WESD violated the constitutional rights of free speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of association for both ACU and its students to free speech. The Goldwater Institute further claimed that WESD’s actions ran afoul of the Arizona Constitution’s “religious test” clauses, which prohibit the government from discriminating based on religion when making hiring decisions.
The organization also pointed out that WESD committed the alleged discrimination despite grappling with an ongoing, historic teacher shortage like other districts.
In the Goldwater Institute’s amicus, or “friend-of-the-court,” brief, the organization said that WESD had unconstitutionally conditioned employment based on ACU’s faith.
“Defendants’ hostility toward Christians is apparently so intense that they cut off a long-standing teacher training program during an historic nationwide teacher shortage, simply because the teachers attended Arizona Christian University (ACU)—a school that espouses traditional Christian beliefs on its website,” said the organization.
ACU believes in Biblical teachings on marriage and sexuality, including that “God created man and woman in His image and likeness, that God wonderfully and immutably creates each person as male or female, and that God intends sexual intimacy to occur only between a man and woman who are married to each other,” per court filings.
AZ Free News first broke the story about WESD’s alleged discrimination. The ultimate decision to cut ties with ACU traces back to public comments from WESD Governing Board Member Tamillia Valenzuela.
Valenzuela — a self-described neurodivergent, queer furry — declared during a board meeting that ACU’s mission of prioritizing Jesus Christ’s teachings didn’t align with WESD priorities. In previous board meetings, Valenzuela has decried any Christian presence at WESD. In contemplating whether to continue the district’s contract with Grand Canyon University (GCU), Valenzuela insisted that WESD should cut ties there as well due to the university being a private Christian institution.
“I am wondering if there’s other options available, one so we are not actively engaging with an institution that’s causing harm and also so we can have options that are not based on a certain faith,” said Valenzuela.
ADF has asked for a preliminary injunction in the case. Their filing outlined various grievances against WESD in regard to their opposition against ACU for its religious beliefs. This included WESD governing board member remarks accusing ACU student teachers of being “openly bigoted,” causing LGBTQ+ people to feel “unsafe.”
“The School District’s policy therefore is loud and clear: Christians with disfavored beliefs are neither welcome nor allowed to serve in the District,” stated ADF.
There will be oral arguments in the case, Arizona Christian University v. Washington Elementary School District, next Tuesday at 10:30 a.m. at the Sandra Day O’Connor courthouse.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
