The Idaho Office of the Attorney General has asked the Idaho Supreme Court to rescind its order blocking the implementation of the state’s new pro-life law. If the court does rescind the order, the law would immediately go into effect.

Senate Bill 1309 is modeled after the Texas Heartbeat Act, which allows for civil lawsuits against abortionists who commit abortions on preborn children with a heartbeat as well as anyone who assists in the abortion. It was signed into law by Gov. Brad Little on March 23, but a week later, Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit to stop the law from taking effect. The state Supreme Court blocked the law while it considers the case.

According to the Idaho Capital Sun, Deputy Attorney General Megan Larrondo filed a brief stating that the court’s decision to block the law was procedurally improper because of a misunderstanding that both parties had agreed to it, which was not the case. Idaho Family Policy Center President Blaine Conzatti claimed that Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden had “cut a deal with Planned Parenthood” in which both he and the abortion corporation agreed to let the court block the law temporarily “in exchange for slowing down court proceedings.” Wasden publicly disputed this claim and Conzatti apologized for the statement while also saying he was simply summarizing court records.

READ: Roe must go: There is no ‘right’ to homicide against undelivered human beings

Larrondo also filed a brief asking the court to strike statements made by Kristine Smith and Dr. Caitlin Gustafson, both of whom work for Planned Parenthood. The statements, according to Larrondo, which included national poverty statistics and restrictions that would be placed on abortion access if the law were to take effect, were speculative rather than factual. Larrondo argued the information should not be admissible in court.

In addition, the court granted a motion in April to allow the Idaho Legislature to intervene in the case, so attorneys for the Speaker of House filed a brief as well, arguing that the law was within the Legislature’s authority and does not violate any Constitutional rights.

“The regrettable disorder and disunity that afflicts our polity is the product of the Roe/Casey abortion regime, and that is what (Planned Parenthood is) defending,” the Legislature’s brief states. “As they have every right to do, just as we, the Idaho Legislature representing the people of the state of Idaho, have every right to seek to end that disorder and disunity by returning the great moral question—What is the moral value of a preborn child?—to where it belongs, the democratic process.”

Recently, however, Live Action founder and president Lila Rose noted that “even a democracy shouldn’t get to decide who lives and dies … it shouldn’t be up for a vote. … [T]hat’s not full justice.”

“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!

The Idaho Office of the Attorney General has asked the Idaho Supreme Court to rescind its order blocking the implementation of the state’s new pro-life law. If the court does rescind the order, the law would immediately go into effect.

Senate Bill 1309 is modeled after the Texas Heartbeat Act, which allows for civil lawsuits against abortionists who commit abortions on preborn children with a heartbeat as well as anyone who assists in the abortion. It was signed into law by Gov. Brad Little on March 23, but a week later, Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit to stop the law from taking effect. The state Supreme Court blocked the law while it considers the case.

According to the Idaho Capital Sun, Deputy Attorney General Megan Larrondo filed a brief stating that the court’s decision to block the law was procedurally improper because of a misunderstanding that both parties had agreed to it, which was not the case. Idaho Family Policy Center President Blaine Conzatti claimed that Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden had “cut a deal with Planned Parenthood” in which both he and the abortion corporation agreed to let the court block the law temporarily “in exchange for slowing down court proceedings.” Wasden publicly disputed this claim and Conzatti apologized for the statement while also saying he was simply summarizing court records.

READ: Roe must go: There is no ‘right’ to homicide against undelivered human beings

Larrondo also filed a brief asking the court to strike statements made by Kristine Smith and Dr. Caitlin Gustafson, both of whom work for Planned Parenthood. The statements, according to Larrondo, which included national poverty statistics and restrictions that would be placed on abortion access if the law were to take effect, were speculative rather than factual. Larrondo argued the information should not be admissible in court.

In addition, the court granted a motion in April to allow the Idaho Legislature to intervene in the case, so attorneys for the Speaker of House filed a brief as well, arguing that the law was within the Legislature’s authority and does not violate any Constitutional rights.

“The regrettable disorder and disunity that afflicts our polity is the product of the Roe/Casey abortion regime, and that is what (Planned Parenthood is) defending,” the Legislature’s brief states. “As they have every right to do, just as we, the Idaho Legislature representing the people of the state of Idaho, have every right to seek to end that disorder and disunity by returning the great moral question—What is the moral value of a preborn child?—to where it belongs, the democratic process.”

Recently, however, Live Action founder and president Lila Rose noted that “even a democracy shouldn’t get to decide who lives and dies … it shouldn’t be up for a vote. … [T]hat’s not full justice.”

“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!