The Pennsylvania state Constitution does not contain a so-called right to abortion—let alone a right for an abortion paid for by Pennsylvania taxpayers.

That is the holding of a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, an affiliate of National Right to Life, and the Thomas More Society, a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to restoring respect for human life.

The two pro-life powerhouses filed the brief in connection with the case known as Allegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Pennsylvania Department of Human Services.

In the case, which is now before the PA Supreme Court, the abortion industry is arguing for a so-called fundamental right to abortion and a right to funding of abortion at taxpayer expense.

The American Medical Association is being led by abortion activists who believe killing an unborn baby in an abortion is “health care.”

On Wednesday, Dr. Gerald E. Harmon, president of the AMA, wrote a column on the association website criticizing a Mississippi law that prohibits abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

Most countries in the world prohibit abortions after 15 weeks, if not sooner, but Harmon slammed the Mississippi law as dangerous and “unacceptable.”

“In the U.S., abortion is a safe and common medical procedure that remains an important component of reproductive health care, which in turn is essential to overall health and well-being,” he wrote.

The full 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected Joe Biden’s demand to stop the Texas abortion ban that has saved thousands of babies from abortion.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman, who was appointed by Barack Obama, sided with the Biden administration’s Justice Department, which sued the state, arguing Texas’ law was unconstitutional because it went against Roe v. Wade.

Shortly after Judge Pitman issued his order, Texas officials quickly appealed and they sought an emergency stay of Pitman’s order in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is known as perhaps the nation’s most conservative appellate court.

Appellate judges then temporarily blocked the lower court’s ruling and the Justice Department filed papers with the appeals court arguing that allowing the law to stay in effect would cause “substantial harm to the United States’ sovereign interests and would disserve the public interest.”

The Supreme Court this term will hear a major abortion case, which will provide the justices with the opportunity to make a long-overdue course correction on vague and unworkable standards set in motion by the court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that don’t account for advances in modern science.

Specifically, the court will answer “whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional” (that is, prohibitions on abortion before the child can survive outside the womb).

The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, stems from Mississippi’s 2018 Gestational Age Act, which prohibits abortions after 15 weeks with exceptions for a medical emergency or a severe fetal abnormality.

Today, Joe Biden’s administration officially asked the Supreme Court to block the Texas abortion ban, which has saved thousands of babies from abortions.

As LifeNews.com reported late last week, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Biden’s demand to block the ban. Previously, U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman, who was appointed by Barack Obama, sided with the Biden administration’s Justice Department, which sued the state, arguing Texas’ law was unconstitutional because it went against Roe v. Wade.

Then, the 5th Circuit rejected Biden’s demand, voting 2-1 to allow the ban to stay in place as the underlying lawsuit continues. That was the third time it has allowed the law to stay in effect, responding to various pro-abortion legal challenges.

In gatherings across the nation at the beginning of this month, abortion advocates vowed they would not “go back” to the days when it was not yet legal to kill children in the womb.

As in most things, the way we see the current Supreme Court abortion case Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health and what it might portend for our nation is a matter of perspective. Those of us who recognize that what has gone on these last nearly 49 years is a crime against humanity see the end of abortion as a big step forward for the USA.

But you don’t even have to be pro-life to see that much has changed since 1973, when an imaginary right to abortion was conjured from the U.S.

Lawyers representing the abortion industry are seeking to strike down Pennsylvania’s long-standing ban on taxpayer funding of abortion.

The attorneys filed a brief with the PA Supreme Court, asking the High Court to abolish the Keystone State’s ban on Medicaid abortion funding in a case called Allegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Pennsylvania Department of Human Services.

Not only does Big Abortion want Pennsylvania taxpayers to foot the bill for abortion. The abortion industry is also calling on the state Supreme Court to establish a so-called right to abortion under the PA Constitution.

This plea by abortion businesses flies in the face of precedent.

Another weekend and another so-called “Women’s March” has come and gone. The “Women’s March” was predictably loud and angry, and it was touted as representing the voices of American women who supposedly are demanding that abortion be kept legal under any circumstance and at any time.

It gathered far more attention than the hundreds of thousands who come to Washington for the March for Life—an event that has taken place every year since 1974!

This March also ignore someone else: the baby in the womb.

Lost in the maze of favorable media attention was be a sad truth: That many of those in attendance will very probably have had abortions themselves or assisted others to get them.