constitutional

Does Obama Really Want To Cut Execs' Pay?

On the one hand, the Wall Street executives who are going to have their salaries cut from millions of dollars a year to no more than $200k should be happy. After all, Barack Obama promised no tax increases for those earning less than $250,000 a year, right? Sure! On the other hand, the president may want to reconsider. With tax revenue dropping like an offed mafioso's car a river, he may need that revenue. Better idea, Mr. President: Instead of cutting their pay 90 percent, let them keep them million-dollar salaries — then tax it at 90 percent. After all, you have to fund health care, right? Plus, the stimulus and free college education and end global warming and green jobs and  . . . .

But before you do, Mr. President, would you please find out if it's constitutional for the federal government to fire and set salaries of people in private business? If it is, then watch out students on federal loans. Next, you'll be told where you can go to college and what classes to take.

Great Eye For The Constitution

As we've been researching the legislative voting records of Bob McDonnell and Creigh Deeds in preparation for media interviews, we came across something rather interesting. In 1998, then Delegate Deeds voted in favor of HB 1154, a ban on partial birth abortion. That law eventually was struck down by the courts as being unconstitutional. Then, in 2003, Senator Deeds voted against SB 1205 and HB 1541, also bans on partial birth abortion. That law was recently upheld by the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

So, as a legislator, Deeds voted for a bill that was found unconstitutional and against a bill that was found constitutional. Great legal analysis by a current member of the Senate Courts of Justice Committee and someone who, should he be elected governor, will be tasked with analyzing the constitutionality of hundreds of bills that land on his desk.

Statement Of Former Attorney General Bob McDonnell On The 4th Circuit's Upholding Of Virginia's Partial Birth Abortion Ban

STATEMENT OF FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL BOB McDONNELL, WHO SECURED THE APPEAL TO THE FULL UNITED STATES 4TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS 

I am pleased that the full U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld Virginia's Partial-Birth Infanticide Ban. Virginia's ban was passed by the General Assembly with bipartisan support. The law reflects the will of the people of the Commonwealth and is substantially similar to the federal ban on the procedure which was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. I congratulate Attorney General Bill Mims for his successful handling of this appeal.

Statement Of Delegate Bob Marshall On The 4th Circuit's Upholding Of Virginia's Partial Birth Abortion Ban

STATEMENT OF DELEGATE BOB MARSHALL, PATRON OF HB 1541, DURING THE 2003 SESSION OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY

The most fundamental purpose of government is to protect human lives. The court did that here.

It is telling that it was Virginia's Thomas Jefferson, who criticized abortion in his Notes on Virginia, and who affirmed in the Declaration of Independence that the first natural right of persons is the right to life which comes directly from God, when he wrote that, "all men are created equal," and that Jefferson didn't say all men are born equal for a reason.

I wanted a law that upheld the right to life of children near birth, would expand the legal protections previously denied such children by other federal court decisions, and which would be constitutional.

Delegate Marshall concluded his statement by quoting from the concurring opinion of Judge J. Harvie Wilkerson:

The fact is that we — civilized people — are retreating to the haven of our Constitution to justify dismembering a partly born child and crushing its skull. Surely centuries hence, people will look back on this gruesome practice done in the name of fundamental law by a society of high achievement. And they will shudder.

Breaking: AG McDonnell To Appeal Partial Birth Abortion Ruling To Full Fourth Circuit Court Of Appeals

Below is the news release issued earlier this morning by Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell concerning his decision to appeal the 2-1 ruling earlier this month by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to strike down Virginia's partial birth abortion ban. 

McDonnell Announces Virginia to Petition for Rehearing of Partial-Birth Abortion Case by Full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

-Move Follows Divided Panel Decision by Same Court Striking down Virginia's Partial-Birth Abortion Ban-

Richmond - Attorney General Bob McDonnell announced today that the Commonwealth of Virginia will ask the full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the decision of a divided panel of the court that struck down Virginia's ban on partial-birth abortion.

Speaking about the decision, Attorney General McDonnell noted, "It is my belief that Virginia's partial-birth abortion ban, passed overwhelmingly by the people's elected representatives in the General Assembly, is constitutional. Given the significance of the issues at stake, and the fact that the United States Supreme Court recently upheld a very similar federal ban on the procedure, the full court should review the ruling by the divided three-judge panel."

On May 20th a three-judge panel of the Court ruled 2-1 against the Commonwealth's partial-birth abortion ban, passed by the General Assembly in 2003. Following this decision the Commonwealth had two options in proceeding: petition for a rehearing by the full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, or appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of the United States.

The petition for rehearing by the full Fourth Circuit will be filed on Monday, June 2, 2008. The Court is expected to rule in approximately a month or two on whether the full court will review the case on the merits. If it does, it will schedule oral argument, most likely in the fall. The case is titled Richmond Medical Center v. Herring.

We applaud this very appropriate and reasoned appeal to this horrendous decision by the U.S. Fourth Circuit panel which trashes the rights of the most vulnerable and innocent among us; and which lacks deference to the overwhelming will of Virginians through its elected legislature (more than two-thirds of each General Assembly chamber), as well as to the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States, which upheld a similar law.

Would You Kill This Child?

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin gave birth to her fifth child, Trig Paxson Van Palin, on April 18. According to the 2-1 ruling earlier this week on Virginia's partial-birth abortion law by a three judge panel of the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Governor Palin had every right to take the life of Trig in the final days of her pregnancy. You see, Trig has Down Syndrome. Considering that many of the late-term abortions that two members of the Fourth Circuit ruled to protect are performed when the child is diagnosed with health complications, Trig is lucky to be alive.

According to Governor Palin, "Trig is beautiful and already adored by us. We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives."

Prenatal testing alerted the Palin's to Trig's condition during the second trimester. At that point, the "procedure" done to "terminate the pregnancy" is called a "Standard Dilation and Evacuation (D&E). According to testimony given the Fourth Circuit's three judge panel, a "Standard D&E" abortion:

Is by far the most common method of pre-viability second trimester abortion, used approximately ninety-five percent of the time. In this procedure the doctor dilates the woman's cervix and uses suction and forceps to remove the fetus. The doctor also uses instruments to hold the vagina open and to gain access to the cervix and uterus. As the doctor uses forceps to pull the fetus out of the cervix during a D&E, friction usually causes parts of the fetus to break off or disarticulate. As a result of disarticulation the fetus is removed in pieces. Throughout the process, the fetus may show signs of life, such as a heartbeat, although disarticulation ultimately causes fetal demise.

However, if Trig's mom and dad had a difficult time deciding what to do, and waited until the final days of pregnancy (right up until the day of birth), and then decided to "terminate," the "procedure" used would have been an "intact D&E":

A doctor intending to perform an intact D&E uses certain methods, such as serially dilating the cervix or rotating the fetus as it is pulled out of the uterus, to increase the likelihood of intact delivery. In an intact D&E, as generally described, the fetal skull is typically too large to pass through the cervix, and the doctor compresses or collapses the skull to complete the abortion.

This is the procedure that just two judges yesterday decided is "Constitutional." 

We do not share these descriptions with you in an attempt to inflame passions. We do so to share them with you simply because many of you may not be aware of what is done to an unborn child in a second or third trimester abortion — many of which take place well after the moment of "viability." We also share them so that you understand that despite this graphic testimony, two judges still voted to allow the second procedure to go on!

We issued a statement the day of the Fourth Circuit's decision that said:

The fact that pro-abortion forces continue to defend the heinous act of partial-birth infanticide with such vigor reveals their extremism. It must be noted that the procedures being discussed, a "dilation and evacuation" abortion and an "intact D&E" both require the dismemberment of an unborn child past the known date of viability.

The vicious hate e-mails we have received as a result of interviews we've done with newspapers and television stations reveal an extremism that shocks even us, who are no strangers to vile and threatening letters from extremists. Pro-abortion forces, such as Planned Parenthood, are vicious in their advocacy for this brutal procedure. But this is yet another opportunity for us to educate our friends, co-workers and neighbors on the reality of abortion. By continuing to defend this procedure, pro-abortion forces give us more opportunity to expose them for who they are.

As you talk to people around you, I urge you to share the story of Trig, a Down Syndrome baby who is a blessing to his family in ways that many cannot comprehend. It is this type of child that is daily being destroyed by "partial-birth abortion." 

For more details on Virginia's ban on partial-birth abortion, which became law in 2003 when the General Assembly over rode then-Governor Mark Warner's amendments, read the following news stories in the:

Richmond Times Dispatch: 4th Circuit panel again strikes down Virginia's partial birth abortion ban

The Washington Post: Va. Abortion Law Overturned Again 

CNN/Associated Press: Court strikes down late-term abortion ban

The New York Times: Virginia Law on Abortion Is Struck Down