Threatening graffiti is seen on the exterior of the Wisconsin Family Action offices in Madison in 2022. Hridindu Roychowdhury, the man accused of firebombing the Wisconsin anti-abortion group’s office, entered a not guilty plea Tuesday to one count of attempting to cause damage by means of fire or an explosive. (Alex Shur/Wisconsin State Journal via AP, File)
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The man accused of firebombing a prominent Wisconsin anti-abortion group’s office has pleaded not guilty.
Investigators believe Hridindu Roychowdhury, of Madison, threw two Molotov cocktails into the Madison office of Wisconsin Family Action last May. He entered a not guilty plea Tuesday to one count of attempting to cause damage by means of fire or an explosive. He also waived his right to appear in court for an arraignment once he is returned to Wisconsin.
One of the firebombs thrown into the anti-abortion group’s office failed to ignite; the other set a bookcase on fire. No one was in the office at the time. The message “If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either” was found spray-painted on the building.
Police arrested Roychowdhury in a Boston airport last month after investigators matched his DNA to samples from the crime scene. He had a one-way ticket to Guatemala, according to the U.S. attorney’s office.
Myra Longfield, a spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office in Madison, said Thursday that Roychowdhury is being held in federal custody but has not yet been returned to Wisconsin. A date has not been set for his initial appearance in court.
Kaul and the coalition warned that revoking federal approval for mifepristone will drastically reduce access to safe abortion care and miscarriage management for millions across the country and would endanger lives and trample states’ authority to protect and promote abortion access.
“The months following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade have made it clearer than ever how vital it is for women to have access to the full array of life-saving reproductive health care services — without interference from politicians. Mifepristone has been used safely for years, and the misguided district court order that would prevent the use of mifepristone must be blocked,” Kaul said in a statement.
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas on Friday ordered the FDA to stay its approval of mifepristone, DOJ officials said. The drug was first approved in 2000 and the ruling was coming in a challenge brought on by anti-abortion groups seeking to revoke the FDA’s approval.
The district court put its ruling on hold for seven days so the federal government and the drug manufacturer have an opportunity to appeal, DOJ officials said. Kaul and coalition members are urging the appeals court to continue to stay the lower court’s decision, citing research and studies for mifepristone’s safety and how abortion plays a role in reproductive health care, especially for low-income, underserved and rural communities.
“The continued availability of mifepristone for medication abortions is critical to safeguarding amici States’ important interest in protecting the health, safety, and rights of their residents, including an interest in ensuring safe access to essential reproductive health care,” according to the brief.
A study showed medication abortion makes up nearly 54 percent of all terminated pregnancies in the U.S. DOJ officials said blocking access to mifepristone would result in people taking part in riskier procedures, and more complicated and costly logistics as the demand for procedural abortions increases in place of medical abortions.
Policy research group Center for American Progress said the U.S. has the highest maternal mortality rates among developed countries, and Black women experience higher rates of maternal death than any other demographic.
Kaul joined attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia to file the brief.
Anti-abortion activists celebrate on June 24 in Washington, D.C., after the U.S. Supreme Court ended constitutional protections for abortion. (AP File Photo/Steve Helber)
By GEOFF MULVIHILL Associated Press
Dueling judicial opinions on the future availability of abortion pills could shake up the U.S. landscape. Less than 10 months after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the nationwide right to abortion, upheaval over what’s allowed and what’s not is escalating. In addition to a wave of new state laws, sweeping actions have come from federal judges in Texas and Washington state. The rulings are prompting more court filings in cases likely to wind up before the Supreme Court. There’s other key action, too: Court arguments in Iowa, legislation and litigation in Montana, and a push for tighter restrictions by lawmakers in Nebraska and Florida all may affect future access to abortion.
New court rulings could spark more change for U.S. abortion policy, which has been in flux since last June when the Supreme Court overturned the nationwide right to an abortion.
Courts are considering big changes, including some with broad implications, as state legislatures enact more restrictions or outright bans.
Here’s what’s happening:
ABORTION PILLS: WHAT’S NEW?
The majority of abortions in the U.S. are obtained using a combination of two medications. Anti-abortion groups have been trying to limit access to one of them.
In dueling decisions last Friday, two federal courts issued conflicting rulings about whether one of the drugs, mifepristone, should remain available.
In a first-of-its kind ruling, a federal judge in Amarillo, Texas, blocked the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the drug, which dates back to the year 2000. The same day, a federal judge in Spokane, Washington, ordered the FDA not to do anything that might block mifepristone’s availability in 17 Democrat-led states suing to keep it on the market. The states are: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, plus the District of Columbia.
ABORTION PILLS: WHAT’S NEXT?
President Joe Biden’s administration has asked a court to block the Texas ruling from taking effect as scheduled Saturday. It also asked the Washington court for clarity on its ruling.
Whichever side loses in either case will almost certainly appeal, ultimately all the way to the nation’s highest court.
In the meantime, some Democrat-controlled states, including New York, which announced plans on Tuesday, have been stockpiling abortion pills, while Wyoming last month became the first state to explicitly prohibit abortion drugs.
OTHER COURTS: WHAT’S NEW?
Across the U.S., advocates have sued over dozens of abortion laws.
In 2019, the Iowa Supreme Court blocked a law prohibiting abortion once cardiac activity can be detected, which occurs after about six weeks of pregnancy and often before women know they are pregnant. Officials in the Republican-dominated state have been pushing to overturn that ruling.
On Tuesday, the issue went before the state Supreme Court, which is now made up entirely of seven Republican appointees. A new decision is expected this summer.
Also on Tuesday, a Montana judge denied Planned Parenthood of Montana’s request to preemptively block legislation before it’s signed that would ban dilation and evacuation abortions, the kind most commonly used in the second trimester of pregnancy. Opponents said they wanted to act quickly because the law would take effect immediately if Gov. Greg Gianforte signs it. Gianforte has previously approved other abortion restrictions.
LAWMAKERS: WHAT’S NEXT?
Nebraska lawmakers are expected to start debate Wednesday on a bill that would ban abortion once cardiac activity can be detected.
In February, the South Carolina state Senate passed such a ban. The same month, the House approved one that would apply throughout pregnancy. The two chambers have not yet negotiated which version to send to the governor.
In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is expected to run for the GOP presidential nomination next year, has supported ending abortion access earlier than the 15-week mark currently in effect there. The state Senate has approved a ban after six weeks’ gestation. The measure and could win House approval and be sent to DeSantis as soon as this week.
LAWMAKERS: WHAT’S ALREADY HAPPENED?
Abortion is already effectively banned at all stages of pregnancy in 13 states, and when cardiac activity can be detected in one.
Courts have blocked bans throughout pregnancy in another five states and in one where the cut-off for the procedure when cardiac activity can be detected.
Republicans in those places and others are pushing for even tougher policies.
This month, Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed a law making it a crime for an adult to help a minor get an abortion without parental consent.
Iowa’s attorney general took another step this month, announcing her office will stop paying for emergency contraception and abortions for sexual assault victims while it studies the policy.
Associated Press’ Margery Beck, Amy Beth Hanson, Anthony Izaguirre, Scott McFetridge and James Pollard also contributed to this report.
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer addresses supporters before signing legislation to repeal the 1931 abortion ban statute, which criminalized abortion in nearly all cases during a bill signing ceremony, Wednesday, April 5, 2023, in Birmingham, Mich. The abortion ban, which fueled one of the largest ballot drives in state history, had been unenforceable after voters enshrined abortion rights in the state constitution last November. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)
BIRMINGHAM, Mich. (AP) — A near-century old abortion ban that fueled one of the largest ballot drives in Michigan history was repealed Wednesday by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, just months after voters enshrined abortion rights in the state’s constitution.
“Today, we’re going to take action to make sure that our statutes and our laws reflect our values and our constitution,” Whitmer said at a bill signing outside of Detroit.
The 1931 abortion ban made it a four-year felony to assist in an abortion. Roe v. Wade had made the law null and void until the landmark decision was overturned in June by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Courts blocked the ban from taking effect while a citizen-led initiative to enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution received more signatures than any other ballot proposal in state history to put the question before voters. Voters overwhelmingly approved the proposal in last November’s midterms, making the 1931 law unconstitutional and unenforceable.
The 1931 ban could have been enforced in the future had voters collected enough signatures to once again amend the state constitution and repeal abortion rights. Whitmer’s signature Wednesday eliminated that possibility, erasing the law completely.
“We cannot allow archaic laws to remain on our books under the assumption that they’ll never be used again,” said Democratic state Rep. Laurie Pohutsky. “We don’t know what the future will hold and we don’t know what plans abortion opponents have.”
Last month, the Michigan House and Senate — each with a two-seat Democratic majority — voted to send a repeal of the abortion ban to the governor. A majority of Republicans opposed the bill, speaking out ahead of the vote on the legality of abortion as a whole.
Pohutsky, who sponsored the legislation repealing the law, said at the event Wednesday that “this is far from the end of the story,” and that the Democratic-controlled Statehouse will continue expanding access to reproductive health care.
Wednesday’s signing marked another victory for abortion rights supporters in Michigan, who joined California and Vermont last November in enshrining abortion rights in their state’s constitution. Kentucky, a reliably red state, rejected a ballot measure aimed at denying any state constitutional protections for abortion.
Voters in Wisconsin elected a Democratic-backed Milwaukee judge Tuesday to the state’s Supreme Court, ensuring liberals will take over majority control of the court with the fate of the state’s abortion ban on the line.
“Who would have thought two years ago, three years ago, five years ago, that we would be as Democrats looking to Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin, Montana and Kentucky to be on the frontline of protecting reproductive freedom for women across this country,” said Laphonza Butler, the president of EMILYs List.
Whitmer joined other speakers at the event in Birmingham in calling out Republican-led states for restricting abortion rights, saying laws in Texas and South Carolina were “un-American, anti-free and, frankly, sickening.”
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has pushed for a six-week ban in his state, is scheduled to appear in Michigan on Thursday to speak at a Midland County GOP event before heading to southern Michigan to speak at Hillsdale College.
FILE – Threatening graffiti is seen on the exterior of Wisconsin Family Action offices in Madison, Wis., May 8, 2022. Investigators on Tuesday, March 28, 2023, finally captured the man they believe firebombed the prominent Wisconsin anti-abortion lobbying group’s office last year ahead of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling. The U.S. attorney’s office in Madison announced that police arrested 29-year-old Hridindu Sankar Roychowdhury at Boston’s Logan International Airport on Tuesday. (Alex Shur/Wisconsin State Journal via AP, File)
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — After nearly a year of searching, investigators used DNA pulled from a half-eaten burrito to capture the man they believe firebombed a prominent Wisconsin anti-abortion lobbying group’s office.
The U.S. attorney’s office in Madison announced that police arrested 29-year-old Hridindu Sankar Roychowdhury at Boston’s Logan International Airport on Tuesday. He was charged via the complaint with one count of attempting to cause damage by means of fire or an explosive.
He made an initial appearance in federal court in Boston on Tuesday. U.S. Magistrate Judge Donald L. Cabell set a detention hearing for Thursday. Roychowdhury’s attorney, Brendan O. Kelley, who is listed in online court records as a federal public defender, declined comment when reached by phone after Tuesday’s hearing.
According to the criminal complaint against Roychowdury, investigators pulled DNA samples from three individuals from evidence at the scene of the Wisconsin attack. But the samples didn’t match any profiles in the U.S. Department of Justice’s DNA database.
As time went on, Wisconsin Family Action President Julaine Appling offered a $5,000 reward for any information leading to an arrest. She accused Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Madison Police Chief Shon Barnes of being more interested in empathizing with abortion rights activists than bringing any suspects to justice.
This past January, police assigned to protecting the state Capitol building in Madison reviewed surveillance video of a protest against police brutality. The footage showed several people spray-painting graffiti on Capitol grounds. The graffiti resembled the graffiti at the Wisconsin Family Action office.
The footage showed two people leaving the area in a white pickup truck, which investigators tracked to Roychowdhury’s residence in Madison, according to the complaint. Police began following him.
On March 1, he pulled into a Madison park-and-ride and threw away a bag of fast food. After he left, police retrieved the bag from the trash can. DNA on a burrito in the bag matched DNA taken from the Wisconsin Family Action office, according to the complaint.
The U.S. attorney’s office said in a statement that Roychowdhury traveled from Madison this month to Portland, Maine. He had a one-way ticket for a flight from Boston to Guatemala City, Guatemala, that was scheduled to depart Tuesday morning when he was arrested, the office said.
Investigators have been unable to match the other two DNA profiles from the scene to anyone, the complaint said.
Appling had no comment Tuesday on Roychowdhury’s arrest.
“I’m very proud of the tireless and determined efforts the combined federal, state and local team put in to identify and arrest this individual,” said William McCrary, the special agent in charge of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives’ St. Paul Field Division, which handles crimes in Wisconsin. “It is very satisfying to me to see that this alleged perpetrator has been placed in custody.”
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, State Sen. Kelda Roys and State Rep. Lisa Subeck announced reintroduction of legislation to repeal the state’s 1849 criminal abortion ban in the current legislative session. Abortion access in the state was left uncertain when the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.
The bill would “cleanly repeal” the Civil War-era abortion prohibitions, the governor’s office said. The state’s 1849 abortion law makes it a felony for a provider to perform an abortion at any stage of felony without exception of rape or incest. The only exception to the law is to save the pregnant person’s life.
Evers said in a statement he wouldn’t sign a bill leaving Wisconsin women with fewer rights and freedoms than they had before Roe.
“This bill will simply restore access to safe, legal abortion in Wisconsin to what it was on June 23, 2022—nothing more, and nothing less. We must restore Roe, and I’m proud to join Legislative Democrats in continuing our fight to restore access to reproductive freedom in Wisconsin with a clean repeal our state’s 1849-era criminal abortion ban,” Gov. Evers said.
Wisconsin’s law, which was enacted before the Civil War and well before women gained the right to vote, would bar patients from access to abortion care they need, Rep. Subeck (D-Madison) said in a statement.
“Abortion is health care. As long as doctors face the threat of prosecution for providing basic reproductive health care, and as long as extremist Republicans continue putting politics ahead of our rights, patients will not have access to the abortion care they need in our state. The bill we introduced today would Restore Roe in Wisconsin by returning the state of abortion access to exactly what it was before Roe v. Wade was overturned, restoring our freedom to make our own reproductive health care decisions without interference from politicians,” Rep. Subeck said.
A Marquette University Law School Poll showed nearly 60% of Wisconsinites supported access to safe and legal abortions, the governor’s office said. Republicans in the Legislature introduced a separate bill to make exceptions to rape and incest to the 1849 law, but Gov. Evers promised to veto the proposal.
“Wisconsinites have made their views clear, and the people of our state support repealing our archaic 1849-era ban on abortion. Today, we introduce the Restore Roe Act so that the will of the people to restore our reproductive freedom may once again be the law of the land,” Rep. Subeck said.
Sen. Roys (D-Madison) said in a statement women and not politicians should be in charge of decisions about their lives, bodies and health.
“Women – not politicians – are the only ones who should make decisions about their bodies, lives, and health. Abortion is common, safe, and not controversial – Wisconsinites overwhelmingly want to see their rights restored to what they were under Roe v. Wade. We cannot afford to make Wisconsin even more hostile to health care providers and pregnant people if we want our state to thrive,” Sen. Roys said.
“Everyone loves someone who will need an abortion, and no one should be treated like a criminal when they do,” Sen. Roys added.
Senate Minority Leader Melissa Agard (D-Madison,) Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) and Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul joined the governor in support of his announcement.
Throughout the entire Wisconsin Supreme Court race, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Janet Protasiewicz has made no secret of her personal views on issues that will likely go before the Wisconsin Supreme Court if she were to be elected. Her opponent, former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly has declined to answer the same questions saying that he will apply the rule of law and deferred many questions back to the legislature.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that Kelly had previously blogged about many of his personal beliefs, but then deleted all of the posts. The Wisconsin Law Journal recovered several of those blog deleted posts, which address a number of issues including women’s rights, Medicare, Social Security, abortion, same-sex marriage, gun control, and a free press.
On Nov. 6, 2012, the very same day President Barack Obama was reelected as president, Kelly dismissed the results of the election in a blog, ‘A present moral consensus.’
With a blatant disregard for what voters decided he called for a debate because he didn’t agree with public consensus. Then he went as far asking if Americans are “cranks” for not sharing his personal beliefs.
Kelly said, “Thus gay marriage, recreational drug use, and tax increases received the public’s straight-up endorsement … So, are we just cranks, or is there still room to debate these issues?”
Speaking of taxes, in one of Kelly’s deleted 2013 blog posts, he attacked the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in response to a Paul Ryan campaign ad.
“That’s why there are campaign ads showing Paul Ryan shoving Granny over the cliff in a wheelchair, but none showing the IRS agent raiding some poor Schmuck’s paycheck to give it to Archer Danels Midland,” Kelly wrote in the blog ‘Not so fast Riddler.’
Kelly blogged quite a bit about his dislike of federal government control and loss of liberty. Instead of advocating for the same-sex couple who couldn’t have a cake decorated in a bakery, it would appear that Kelly is more concerned about the loss of liberty for the Christian bakery shop owners who didn’t want to be compelled by the government to make the cake.
“The correct question is not whether it is important to grant Christians an exception from having to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. In terms of how we live together in society, you will always come out on the losing side of that inquiry,” Kelly said in the deleted blog post ‘How to nosily concede your liberty.’
In another blog post about Green Bay Packers legend Vince Lombardi, Kelly said, “Lombardi’s football is to the game, as work is to the economy.”
Kelly went on to say, “Wealth is what follows from the peculiar activity called work.”
But does that imply everyone who works becomes wealthy?
Kelly “needs a dose of reality,” a reader commented on a social media post where Kelly talks about his views on Medicare and Social Security.
“I don’t think you can derive wealth-transfer programs from the protection of life, liberty, and property otherwise known as the pursuit of happiness,” Kelly wrote in the blog ‘Unmasked riddlers.’
As previously reported, Kelly also wrote that he thinks Social Security is just for those folks who “have chosen to retire without sufficient assets to support themselves.”
On the issue of guns and the Second Amendment, Kelly is critical of both sides.
“Neither side is eager to engage the other on what this constitutional provision actually means,” Kelly wrote. “The Second Amendment is not … about hunting nor personal defense,” Kelly wrote noting that it’s really about having a well regulated militia.
In several of Kelly’s deleted blog posts he again attacked women’s rights, the entire Democratic party, and the news media.
In one post Kelly appears to have compared those who have abortions to the news media saying both have no values and destroys lives in a now deleted blog post titled ‘Do they know how do we know they know.’
“They know abortion takes the life of an unborn child, and if they said otherwise they know they would be laughed out of the room. It is not knowledge or rationality they lack, but a correct ordering of values. And the media, what of them? How about a very specific example of knowingly fronting for a system that destroys lives?,” Kelly said.
Kelly then bashes the New York Times after winning a Pulitzer prize.
Kelly blogged quite a bit about our Founding Fathers quoting them and also attacked journalists. But was it not Jefferson who said, “Our liberty depends on freedom of press, and without that cannot be limited without being lost?”
Kelly continues labeling journalists and women as elitists.
“If the cultural elite are so lacking in reason that they cannot connect the dots between what they do and what happens afterwards, they certainly aren’t capable of engaging in rational conversation,” Kelly said.
The Wisconsin Law Journal and The Daily Reporter have made multiple attempts to speak with Kelly over the past week via telephone and email communications. His campaign has not returned our calls, nor have they replied to our emails. However, in past comments, Kelly has made it clear that he would only apply the rule of law and does not let personal opinion influence his court decisions.
Calling Democrats and women “the cultural elite,” Kelly said they are united in an agenda to take human lives.
“… The Democratic Party, a major women’s organization, and a single-purpose special interest group to a policy deadly to children. The subject, you might guess, is abortion. The Democratic Party favors it, the National Organization of Women is adamantly supportive, and the National Abortion Rights Action league has single-minded purpose of keeping it legal,” Kelly wrote.
“Each of these culturally-elite organizations has invested heavily in both dollars, and intellectual effort, in normalizing the practice of abortion, making it culturally acceptable. An abortion, of course, involves taking the life of a human being,” Kelly added.
In another now deleted blog post of Kelly’s ‘An irrational lack of fear’ Kelly talks about how Americans are losing their freedom under Democrats.
A reader comment ironically points out that Kelly’s point of view on prohibiting same sex marriage, reducing Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment benefits, and his views on reproductive rights are also the loss of freedom for those who don’t share his personal views.
As previously reported by the Wisconsin Law journal, in response to the deleted posts, Protasiewicz said, “Dan Kelly shares extreme right-wing views that go against everything Wisconsinites believe in. We believe in common sense, treating each other with respect, and following the law.”
Another blog post Kelly wrote that “No one at Planned Parenthood or NARAL has ever seen a sonogram of a late-term unborn child.” The Wisconsin Law Journal reached out to Planned Parenthood on Sunday morning.
Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Dan Kelly speaks at a Milwaukee Press Club and Rotary luncheon March 14, 2023 in Milwaukee (Staff Photo: Steve Schuster)
Questions about Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidate Dan Kelly’s deleted blog were raised at a Milwaukee Press Club and the Milwaukee Rotary Club luncheon earlier in this week now prompting new unanswered questions.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Corrinne Hess asked former Justice Dan Kelly about his comments regarding abortion in a now deleted Kelly blog post.
A packed room full of Wisconsin journalists (including from the Wisconsin Law Journal) and Milwaukee Rotary Club members filled the War Memorial last week asking Kelly questions. Hess asked Kelly why he can’t talk about something he blogged about.
“Judge Protasiewicz has talked a lot about her values when it comes to reproductive rights, and you’ve said that makes her unable to be impartial. But you’ve written in your own blog that abortion takes the life of an unborn child, which would be your belief. How is that different?” Hess asked. Hess also asked Kelly if he stood by the comments he made in the post.
Kelly said his political views had nothing to do with the court.
“A fair amount of (blog posts) were expressing my political views … In a campaign we should be talking about the things that are relevant to the work of the court. We know without question the politics and my political views are completely irrelevant to the work of the court,” Kelly said at the luncheon.
But how are women’s reproductive rights or collective bargaining not relevant to the work of the court? Kelly declined to comment on both issues and deferred to the legislature.
The Wisconsin Law Journal has recovered many of Kelly’s deleted posts and have questions of our own. Kelly contributed to a blog from 2012 – 2015 called “Hang Together.”
In one of the deleted blog posts, Kelly titled “why you’re not the boss of me,” Kelly appears to contradict what he has most recently publicly stated. The blog post indicates that the people are not the boss of Kelly. However, recently Kelly has publicly stated how he serves at the pleasure of Wisconsinites and how the public is his boss. So which is it?
Other deleted posts refer to “homosexuals” and speak unfavorably about Muslims. Several of Kelly’s deleted posts discuss his views of Christianity, raising questions about how Kelly would respect the wall of separation between church and state.
In Kelly’s deleted OK Coral post, he attacked the media.
“The media, however, has been strangely silent on how destructive this is to women. They’ve even gone beyond silence– they actual run interference for radical Islam,” Kelly wrote.
Kelly blogged on everything from abortion and same sex marriage to social welfare and Social Security.
Regarding abortion, Kelly wrote that those who are pro-choice are simply here “to preserve sexual libertinism.”
On same sex marriage, Kelly said permitting same-sex couples to marry is simply “using the power of the state to compel others to legitimize the same-sex couples.”
Regarding his view on social welfare, Kelly wrote, our current system is “about as advanced as you can get without actually sliding into socialism.”
On Social Security and Medicare, Kelly said that he thinks that’s just for those folks who “have chosen to retire without sufficient assets to support themselves.”
Below is a list of some of the recovered blog posts Kelly authored. Click on each title to open each respective post.
In response to the deleted posts, Kelly’s opponent Judge Janet Protasiewicz said, “Dan Kelly shares extreme right-wing views that go against everything Wisconsinites believe in. We believe in common sense, treating each other with respect, and following the law.”
The Wisconsin Law Journal reached out to Kelly’s campaign on March 16 for comment, but to date they have not responded.
As previously reported by the Wisconsin Law Journal, it’s no secret that the outcome of Wisconsin’s April Supreme Court election will have widespread national implications. Wisconsinites are anticipating that the state Supreme Court justices will be faced with decisions that will have a profound impact extending well beyond Wisconsin’s borders, especially given the fact that Wisconsin will once again be a battleground state for the 2024 presidential election. The opening 2024 Republican presidential debate will be hosted in Milwaukee in August, the Republican National Committee announced on Feb. 23. Suffice it to say, both candidates agree that the open swing seat on Wisconsin’s highest court is valuable real estate.
The April 4 election is only a little more than two weeks away. The one and only debate will be held March 21, 2023.
Officials with the State Bar of Wisconsin said that anyone can watch the debate by clicking here at 12:45 p.m. It will also be replayed at 4 p.m. on March 21.
“The streamed broadcast will also air on WISC-TV in Madison and WKBT in La Crosse,” said a State Bar of Wisconsin spokesperson.
Part II: Kelly’s recovered blogs reveal his views on guns, women’s rights, a free press, Social Security, Medicare, same-sex marriage, legalizing marijuana, abortion, and much more. Click here to read more.
After the House of Delegates approved the bill last week to create a referendum on enshrining a right to abortion in the state constitution, the Senate passed its companion bill Tuesday, reports The Baltimore Sun.
The Maryland House voted Friday to enshrine the right to abortion in the state Constitution, one of several steps lawmakers are taking this legislative session to protect abortion rights after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year.
The House voted 99-37 for the constitutional amendment, which also is advancing in the state Senate. If the measure passes the General Assembly, voters would have a chance to approve it in November 2024.
“There’s nothing more important than ensuring that Marylanders’ personal rights and freedoms are protected and extended equally,” House Speaker Adrienne Jones, a Democrat who is sponsoring the constitutional protection, said in a statement. “The House and Senate will continue to work together to ensure that we pass the full package of reproductive rights bills so anyone seeking or providing abortion care in Maryland is protected.”
The measure passed with no debate Friday, after Republican-sponsored amendments were rejected during debate earlier in the week.
“You can have different ideas about abortion or when abortion rights should or should not be triggered, but I think a lot of us just feel like a constitutional amendment is not necessary,” Del. Jason Buckel, an Allegany County Republican who is the House minority leader, said in an interview after the vote. “We’ve made that argument multiple times. It’s obviously fallen on deaf ears, and that’s the way it is.”
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, giving control over abortion to the states. Since then, states have been working to either restrict or strengthen abortion access.
Last month, Democratic Gov. Wes Moore and Maryland Democrats from both houses gathered to show unified support for the constitutional amendment, as well as other measures protecting abortion rights, which also are moving forward in the Democratic-controlled legislature.
Democratic Senate President Bill Ferguson said the country is in “a once in 50-year moment where a settled constitutional law was usurped by six justices.”
“This is a surreal moment in time, and so it’s important that Maryland stand firm and show that we are a state where we believe that reproductive health, freedom and liberty matter and are protected and so we need to take the steps that are necessary to do that, and so we will,” Ferguson told journalists shortly before the House vote Friday morning.
The right to abortion already is protected in Maryland law. The state approved legislation in 1991 to protect abortion rights if the Supreme Court allowed abortion to be restricted. The Maryland law was petitioned to the ballot and voters approved the right in 1992 with 62% of the vote. Advocates argue that adding the protection to the state constitution would make it even harder for opponents to try to strip away abortion rights in the future.
Lawmakers also are advancing legislation designed to protect patients and providers in Maryland from criminal, civil and administrative penalties relating to abortion bans or restrictions in other states.
A separate data-privacy bill aims to protect medical and insurance records on reproductive health in electronic health information exchanges that can be shared quickly and widely across state lines.
Another measure would ensure public colleges and universities in Maryland have a plan for student access near campuses to birth control, including emergency contraception and abortion pills.
Last year, Maryland lawmakers enacted a law over then-Gov. Larry Hogan’s veto to expand abortion access by ending a restriction that only physicians could provide abortions and requiring most insurance plans to cover abortion care without cost. The law enabled nurse practitioners, nurse midwives and physician assistants to provide abortions with training.
Wisconsin Supreme Court justice candidate Dan Kelly accused the news media of inconsistencies and his opponent, Janet Protasiewicz, of lying. He further claimed Protasiewicz slandered him and all other criminal defense attorneys while answering questions before a panel of reporters on topics ranging from abortion and election fraud to gerrymandering and collective bargaining.
The Wisconsin Law Journal and The Daily Reporter were in attendance along with journalists from across the state and members of the general public during a joint event that was hosted by the Milwaukee Press Club and Milwaukee Rotary on Tuesday. The panelists included Charles Benson with TMJ4, Corrinne Hess with The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and Victor Jacobo with CBS 58 and Telemundo Wisconsin.
Kelly’s opponent, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Janet Protasiewicz, declined an invitation to the joint event, citing a scheduling conflict as the reason.
Calling the ads run against him by Protasiewicz “nothing but a dirty path of lies,” Kelly encouraged the media and general public to fact check her ads.
“Anyone can look at the public record and see that’s not true,” Kelly said.
A spokesperson for the Protasiewicz campaign disagreed.
“Dan Kelly’s entire record is a sham. He is an extreme, right-wing politician who is desperate to hide his record of corruption on the bench and taking radical positions on abortion, Social Security and more. Dan Kelly and his billionaire allies have been lying about Janet from day one,” said the Protasiewicz campaign spokesperson.
Kelly specifically referenced an allegation in Protasiewicz’s ads where she claimed Kelly represented clients who were accused of sexual abuse of minors.
“My opponent wants everyone in the state of Wisconsin to believe that I represented them through trial,” Kelly said.
“There is also slander … (Protasiewicz) says the only reason that (Kelly) represented (clients accused of sexually assaulting minors) is because he likes the type of crime his clients were accused of committing. And that is preposterous and I’d even go so far as to say that is a truly stupid thing to say … there is no intelligence behind it, there is no reasoning and there are no facts and yet she says it anyway,” Kelly said.
“It’s a slander against me, but not just against me, it’s a slander against all attorneys who handle criminal defense matters, suggesting that all of them like the kinds of crimes their clients are charged with committing. I’ve known hundreds of defense attorneys over the years and I’ve yet to meet one who approves of the crimes their clients are accused of committing. That’s preposterous,” Kelly said.
A spokesperson for the Protasiewicz campaign once again disagreed.
“Wisconsinites can follow the facts in all of our ads and see the truth for themselves. After he pocketed $20,000, he decided to un-recuse himself in the Zignego case. After being closely tied to a right-wing group, he ruled in their favor more than six times – even after litigants asked for his recusal. The former chair of the Republican Party of Wisconsin revealed to the January 6th commission that Kelly was the right-wing lawyer behind the scenes in the fake elector scheme that led to the attack on the U.S. Capitol. These are clear facts and should be disqualifying for any candidate,” a Protasiewicz campaign spokesperson said.
“As a veteran prosecutor who has dedicated her career to protecting the rights of victims, Judge Protasiewicz has earned the reputation for being fair and impartial. She is running for Supreme Court because extreme political positions and self-interest should never be put above the law and the constitutional rights of Wisconsinites,” a Protasiewicz campaign spokesperson added.
Critical of his media coverage, especially coverage about fake electors, Kelly alleged that “there are stories out there … that are wildly inconsistent.”
Kelly said despite a 30-minute conversation with officials on fake electors, he was still not “in the loop.”
“And yet the article goes on to say I that was in the center of the whole thing. I’m not sure how that’s supposed to work, how you cannot be in the loop and in the center of the whole thing simultaneously, of course you can’t,” Kelly said.
NBC News described Kelly as “A Donald Trump ally who advised Republicans on legal efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential race.”
However, Kelly said in his tenure of practicing law he’s had a very diverse client base.
“I’ve represented people from all-across the political spectrum. They came to me because they saw in me a good lawyer. I understand that’s why all of my clients came to me, not because of my politics,” Kelly said, noting that one of his clients was the Republican Party.
Historically, Republicans have been hands off with regulation on guns, the environment, and railway safety. When it comes to abortion why is that an exception? Why should someone in Madison or Washington, D.C., be able to regulate such a personal decision for a woman, the Wisconsin Law Journal asked Kelly during the event.
In response, Kelly said, “It’s a great question and I think there are some folks that you can ask about it who would probably give you a pretty good answer, but out of all the folks that might give you good answer, it doesn’t include me, you need to talk to some legislators about that.”
Meanwhile over at the Republican controlled Wisconsin Legislature, a measure was introduced Wednesday creating an exception to the state’s 1849 abortion ban in cases of rape and incest.
In past years, Republicans have been known as the “small government party.” However, in more recent times, that has evolved and now the GOP has been involved in regulation of not just abortion, but also rights pertaining to what’s taught in classrooms, transgender and LGBTQ rights.
“The only thing Republicans don’t regulate these days are what could hurt big corporations,” said a Wisconsin government attorney, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Kelly was extremely critical of his opponent receiving a significant amount of out-of-state donations for her campaign.
“I’ve been told the eyes of the nation are upon us as we approach April 4. If the spending is any indication of that, it’s certainly true. … I think the nation needs to get out a little bit more. This is a Wisconsin matter. We can take care of Wisconsin business here,” Kelly said.
Noting Kelly’s association with former Gov. Walker, The Daily Reporter asked Kelly if he would impartially handle the state’s right-to-work law if the issue was brought before the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Kelly said he would no longer apply the rule of law as a jurist in the event the Legislature repealed the current law.
In a previous interview with the Wisconsin Law Journal, Kelly expressed his views on unions and Act 10. He said his personal opinion were as “irrelevant to the work of the court as my favorite Italian dish.”
Enacted in June 2011, Act 10 reduced collective bargaining rights for state employees, including K-12 teachers. Public employees and teachers were required to pay more toward retirement and health care plans. The action drew as many as 100,000 protestors to the Wisconsin State Capitol in Madison.
The “right-to-work” law bars employers and labor unions from entering into agreements where employees are required to join a union as a condition of employment, a memo from the Wisconsin Legislative Council said.
“Under the Act, a private sector employer may not enter into an agreement with a labor organization that requires employees in a collective bargaining unit to be members of a labor organization as a condition of employment,” according to the council memo.
Questions about gerrymandering were also raised during Tuesday’s press event.
Johns Hopkins Political Science Professor Matthew Crenson previously said during an interview with the Wisconsin Law Journal that he has been following Wisconsin legal news and that he was shocked by the voter ID laws and gerrymandering of maps in the state during recent times.
“Wisconsin used to be known as one of the most progressive states in our nation,” Crenson said. “I would have expected this (voter suppression tactics) from places like Mississippi and Alabama, but never in a place like Wisconsin. Wisconsin is deeply rooted with strong academic institutions that don’t exist in other states. Yet, the Wisconsin Legislature has taken steps to restrict voting. Clearly the Republicans in Wisconsin have tried to seize control to grasp at whatever they can. But make no mistake, the future doesn’t look bright for future Republicans. Wisconsin’s right-wing had better be careful. If they push things too far, the state’s Democrats will mobilize and reset the balance in the state.”
Other’s in the D.C. area also closely following.
On Tuesday, Hillary Clinton formally endorsed Protasiewicz in a tweet to her 31.5 million followers.
Amanda Zurawski, one of five plaintiffs in Zurawski v. State of Texas, speaks in front of the Texas State Capitol in Austin, Texas, Tuesday, March 7, 2023, as the Center for Reproductive Rights and the plaintiffs announced their lawsuit, which asks for clarity in Texas law as to when abortions can be provided under the “medical emergency” exception. All five women were denied medical care while experiencing pregnancy complications that threatened their health and lives. (Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman via AP)
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Five women who said they were denied abortions even when pregnancy endangered their lives are suing Texas over its abortion ban, the latest legal fight against state restrictions since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.
The lawsuit filed Monday in state court said the Texas law, one of the strictest in the country, is creating confusion among doctors, who are turning away some pregnant women experiencing health complications because they fear repercussions.
“Nobody should have to wait until they are at death’s door to receive health care,” said Nancy Northup, CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is providing legal representation for the women.
Similar legal challenges to abortion restrictions have arisen in states across the country since the Supreme Court overturned the landmark 1973 decision establishing a constitutional right to abortion. As clinics have shuttered in Republican-dominant states with strict abortion bans, some patients have had to cross state lines.
According to the Texas suit brought by the five women and two doctors, one woman, Amanda Zurawski, was forced to wait until she developed blood poisoning before being provided an abortion. The four others had to travel out of state to receive medical care for pregnancy-related complications after doctors recommended an abortion because of the deteriorating condition of the woman, the baby or a twin — care that could not be legally provided in Texas.
“My doctor could not intervene as long as her heart was beating or until I was sick enough for the ethics board of the hospital to consider my life at risk and permit the standard health care I needed at that point,” Zurawski said Tuesday at a news conference, recalling her pregnancy after 18 months of fertility treatment with a baby she named Willow.
The group wants clarification of the law, which they say is written vaguely and has made medical professionals wary of facing liability if the state does not consider the situation a medical emergency.
In an email Tuesday, a spokesman for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he is “committed to doing everything in his power to protect mothers, families, and unborn children, and he will continue to defend and enforce the laws duly enacted by the Texas Legislature.”
Doctors in the state now face felony criminal charges if they perform an abortion in all but limited cases in which the life of the patient is in danger.
John Seago, president of the anti-abortion group Texas Right to Life, said the lawsuit dealt with very specific medical situations, two of which were cases that the existing law would have protected as a medical emergency. In those cases, he said he would consider the lack of intervention medical malpractice.
“These doctors should not have waited,” Seago said, adding that Texas law does not require doctors to wait until a patient is near death.
Seago said the other three cases, dealing with disabilities of the fetus or a recommendation from a doctor to abort one fetus to give a twin a better chance of survival, would have been prohibited from an abortion. He said there seems to be a disconnect with medical practitioners regarding what is permissible and providing clarification is important.
Doctors in Texas are afraid to speak publicly about the situation for fear of retaliation, Dr. Damla Karsan said in the lawsuit, and “widespread fear and confusion regarding the scope of Texas’s abortion bans has chilled the provision of necessary obstetric care, including abortion care.”
At the news conference, Anna Zargarian described how she flew from Texas to Colorado to get an abortion after her water broke prematurely. Doctors told her she could become dangerously ill and the fetus would likely not survive.
“An already extremely difficult situation had an extra layer of trauma because of medical decisions that were made by lawmakers and politicians and not by me or based on best medical practice,” Zargarian said.
Sarah Hoyt, front left, Olivia Spitznagl and Izzy Stewart-Adams, right, all seniors at West High School, attend a protest outside the state Capitol in Madison in May. (Amber Arnold/Wisconsin State Journal via AP)
By SCOTT BAUER Associated Press
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Republican-backed candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court provided legal advice to one of the state’s leading anti-abortion groups, work that Wisconsin Right to Life and Dan Kelly have not detailed but that is being used against Kelly by his liberal opponent.
The high-stakes race, expected to shatter national spending records, will determine majority control of the court and likely the fate of abortion access in the state.
With the state Supreme Court likely to hear a challenge to Wisconsin’s 1849 ban on abortions at any stage of pregnancy, the candidates’ positions have become a central focus of the race. National groups are promising to spend big before the April 4 election.
Kelly is endorsed by the state’s three top anti-abortion groups, including Wisconsin Right to Life. Democratic-backed candidate Janet Protasiewicz has run as a vocal supporter of abortion rights, something Kelly says goes too far in showing how she might rule on an existing lawsuit.
Protasiewicz, a Milwaukee County circuit judge, went after Kelly on abortion in one of her first ads after the two of them advanced from a four-candidate primary last week. In the spot, Protasiewicz labels Kelly as too extreme, claiming, “For years, Kelly was on the payroll of a radical anti-abortion group working to take away women’s rights.”
The ad references a 2016 letter of recommendation from Heather Weininger, the executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life. The letter came when Kelly applied for an appointment to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
“Dan Kelly is someone who I have known professionally for many years and who has provided great counsel to Wisconsin Right to Life in legal manners, as well as to a previous employer of mine, and has done great work with the Federalist Society in Wisconsin,” Weininger wrote.
Weininger and Kelly’s campaign spokesperson, Chad Doran, did not respond to emails Monday asking what work Kelly did for the group.
Wisconsin Right to Life’s legislative and political action committee director, Gracie Skogman, said in an email that Kelly “has never been on Wisconsin Right to Life’s payroll, as mentioned in that ad” but did not respond to emails seeking additional details about what work he did.
Kelly was appointed to the state Supreme Court in 2016 and served until 2020, when he lost a bid for a full 10-year term. His endorsement by Wisconsin Right to Life was raised in that campaign as well, but it did not get as much attention then.
Neither Kelly nor Protasiewicz has said exactly how they would rule when the challenge to Wisconsin’s abortion ban comes to the court. But both have given clear signals about where they stand.
Kelly has expressed opposition to abortion in the past, including in a 2012 blog post in which he said the Democratic Party and the National Organization for Women were committed to normalizing the taking of human life.
In addition to Wisconsin Right to Life, Kelly is also endorsed by Wisconsin Family Action and Pro-Life Wisconsin.
Pro-Life Wisconsin only endorses candidates “who recognize the personhood of the preborn baby and hold the principled and compassionate no-exceptions pro-life position.” The Wisconsin Right to Life Political Action Committee said when it announced its backing of Kelly that it only endorses candidates “who have pledged to champion pro-life values and stand with Wisconsin Right to Life’s legislative strategy.”
Protasiewicz is backed by EMILY’s List, a national group that seeks to elect women who support abortion rights.
Protasiewicz has emphasized her support for abortion rights in the campaign, saying “reproductive rights” is at stake. She has said she’s voicing her values, not how she would rule on a particular case. Republicans claim she has violated the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits candidates from pledging how they would rule on specific cases.
Protasiewicz and her backers, including the Wisconsin Democratic Party, see abortion as a winning issue coming off the 2022 midterm election where Democratic candidates, such as Gov. Tony Evers, who ran on the issue, performed well.
A Marquette University Law School poll from November showed that only 37% of respondents supported the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision overthrowing Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortions. That same poll showed 84% support exceptions for rape and incest. Those exceptions are not included in the state’s current law, which was enacted a year after statehood.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Free Newsletter
