The Court of Appeals in Michigan has told a lower court judge who banned enforcement of an abortion law that has been on the state’s books for decades to respond to a challenge to that decision.
It was Court of Claims trial judge Elizabeth Gleicher who recently issued an injunction against Attorney General Dana Nessel that prevents her from enforcing Michigan’s abortion statute, a ban that has been on the books since 1931.
The pro-abortion Nessel already had said she would not enforce it, but the pro-abortion Gleicher made that an order.
But the agenda of the two public officials was challenged in court by the Great Lakes Justice Center, along with the Alliance Defending Freedom, and now the Court of Appeals has accepted that complaint, and has issued an order allowing for immediate consideration of the case.
The court further set a briefing schedule for Gleicher to respond to the complaint, the GLJC explained.
Great Lakes said it represents two prosecutors, Jerry Jarzynka from Jackson County and Christopher Becker from Kent County, and ADF represents Michigan Right to Life and the Michigan Catholic Conference.
The fight is part of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s pro-abortion “assault on the rule of law,” which includes her executive order demanding that all state agencies refuse to cooperate with, or help with, law enforcement investigations of possible violations of the state’s criminal abortion law.
“Apparently, the governor believes she can order those under her charge to refuse to cooperate with law enforcement or prosecutors seeking to carry out their constitutional duties. This arguably violates her constitutional duty to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed,'” the GLJC reported.
“We are pleased that the Court of Appeals has accepted our complaint against Judge Gleicher and granted our Motion for Immediate Consideration,” said David Kallman, senior legal counsel for GLJC. “However, Governor Whitmer continues to abuse her power. A governor should never be ordering government officials to refuse to cooperate with law enforcement.”
The fight erupted over the possibility that the U.S. Supreme Court would overturn Roe v. Wade, that 1973 decision that created out of the implications of the Constitution a “right” to abortion.
A leaked draft opinion suggests that the majority of the court will do that, although that opinion has not been released officially.
That would not ban abortion, but simply would return regulation of the industry that kills the unborn to the states.
Various states are frantically trying to embed in their own laws, or state constitutions, advocacy for abortion. For example, Colorado’s Democrat-majority legislature adopted a law that says the unborn have absolutely no “rights” in the state. California is another state that is setting itself up as an “abortion destination” location.
The GLJC earlier explained that it was a sham lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood against Nessel through which Gleicher ordered that the state’s existing ban on abortion, which would become effective when Roe is canceled, could not be enforced.
The alleged predicate for the case was because the U.S. Supreme Court “might” overturn Roe v Wade. No one has been prosecuted under the law in decades. AG Nessel publicly stated she had no intent to prosecute anyone under the law, so the lawsuit was not necessary, the GLJC explained.
Further, Gleicher had a conflict in the case, as she previously had represented Planned Parenthood in the Mahaffey case, in 1997, attempting to find a right to abortion in Michigan’s Constitution.
She lost at the Court of Appeals, which ruled the constitution doesn’t endow that “right.”
Further, she is an admitted annual financial contributor to Planned Parenthood, the center reported.
“Judge Gleicher’s decision seriously undermines the public’s confidence in, and reliance on, a fair and impartial judiciary. She has failed to avoid all appearance of impropriety, and she has shown utter disregard for the law,” explained William Wagner, president of the Great Lakes Justice Center.
WND reported that the fate of Roe remains uncertain, although a ruling is expected within weeks.
The draft opinion that apparently was supported by the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court was leaked to a reporter, and it revealed the result could overturn Roe and give regulatory power over abortion back to the states.
For 25 years, WND has boldly brought you the news that really matters. If you appreciate our Christian journalists and their uniquely truthful reporting and analysis, please help us by becoming a WND Insider!
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.