Planned Parenthood Is People, My Friend
Mr. Romney was making a point about economics. After he said he didn't want to raise taxes on people, an Iowa State Fair heckler shouted: 'Corporations!' Mr. Romney explained: 'Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people.' The Obama campaign used the remark 'to paint Romney as a heartless corporate predator,' as the Harvard Business Review put it. It didn't help that Mr. Romney's comment echoed Charlton Heston's famous last words in the 1973 film 'Soylent Green' about his discovery that the processed food was made of human remains.
The comment came at a time when the Democratic left was outraged about legal corporate personhood—specifically Citizens United v. FEC (2010), a Supreme Court decision that affirmed corporations' right to engage in political speech. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens denounced 'the conceit that corporations must be treated identically to natural persons'—legalese for individual human beings—'in the political sphere.'
Which brings us back to Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. v. Kennedy. The corporate plaintiffs fully embrace that 'conceit.' They allege that the defunding measure violates their freedom of speech by punishing their advocacy of 'access to sexual and reproductive health care, including the right to safe and legal abortion.' They also claim violations of their rights to free association under the First Amendment and equal protection under the Fifth Amendment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
16 minutes ago
- Fox News
Federal appeals court rules against Trump's birthright citizenship executive order
President Donald Trump's executive order (EO) putting an end to birthright citizenship faced another legal setback after a federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled it to be unconstitutional. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco affirmed a lower court's decision blocking the nationwide enforcement of the EO, which would deny citizenship to babies born to people illegally or temporarily in the U.S. A three-judge panel ruled against Trump's plan in a 2-1 vote, keeping a decision first made by U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour in Seattle in place. "The district court correctly concluded that the Executive Order's proposed interpretation, denying citizenship to many persons born in the United States, is unconstitutional. We fully agree," the majority wrote. Though the Supreme Court has since restricted lower courts from issuing nationwide injunctions, the majority in the 9th Circuit ruled against the EO after discovering the case fell under an exception left open by SCOTUS justices. States filed the case against the Trump administration after arguing that a nationwide order is needed to block the EO in order to prevent problems that would arise from birthright citizenship being outlawed in some states. "We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a universal injunction in order to give the States complete relief," wrote Judges Michael Hawkins and Ronald Gould, both of whom were appointed by former President Bill Clinton. Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, dissented after deciding that states don't have the legal right or standing to sue the Trump administration over this. He did not weigh in on the constitutionality of ending birthright citizenship. The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment states that people born or naturalized in the U.S., or "subject to United States jurisdiction," are American citizens, but Department of Justice attorneys argue that does not mean children are automatically American citizens based solely on birth location. Trump's EO would deny American citizenship to a child born to a mother without legal or permanent status in the U.S., and whose father does not hold legal or permanent status. The Trump administration is facing at least nine lawsuits across the country challenging the EO.
CBS News
36 minutes ago
- CBS News
San Francisco will fund rental subsidies, end 90-day shelter limit for homeless families
Homeless families in San Francisco are celebrating two key wins to help them stay off the streets. One would end the city's experimental policy to limit shelter stays to 90 days. The other will provide crucial funding to help families find housing. Months of negotiations came to an end as the Board of Supervisors and Mayor Daniel Lurie's office finalized details to help homeless families. "What it boils down to is the kids," said Jennifer Friedenbach, the Executive Director of the Coalition on Homelessness. "Having a safe and decent place to call home is really transformative for the children to have a table to sit at, to have a lock on the door. I mean, it makes all the difference in the world." Friedenbach said the number of families experiencing homelessness has doubled this year. The funding of $30 million for rental subsidies and the end of shelter evictions will help provide kids some peace of mind. "The impact on kids is quite devastating," she said. "They have a much higher increased chance of experiencing or witnessing violence. Their educational outcomes are dramatically diminished." District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder played a critical role in making sure money from Prop C, the Our City Our Home Fund, is diverted back to families. She said the number one reason people fall into homelessness is job loss, and city governments are having to find ways to fund crucial services despite facing budget deficits. "While the federal government is prioritizing funding for ICE, tax breaks for corporations," said Supervisor Fielder. "We're having to pick up the tab here locally in San Francisco, where we're at a point people who have fallen through the cracks, and there are thousands of people." Homeless families are often the ones left behind. According to the Coalition on Homelessness, families make up 40% of the homeless population but only get 9% of the resources available. "What we see again and again is the policy makers prioritize more visual elements of the homeless population and completely ignore the invisible people and families are invisible," said Friedenbach. While the end of the 90-day shelter evictions will likely increase wait times for new families to get into shelters, Friedenbach said kicking people out only created fake successes. She said the key is to make sure enough housing is available. "We've long kind of balanced this idea between longer waits versus putting people out," she said. "And have landed on the spot of once we're investing in folks, let's take them to the finish line. Let's make sure they can move out of shelter into housing. And let's do that as quickly as possible so that another family who's in need can move in."
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jen's Version: Psaki helps Gabbard answer press questions honestly
Jen Psaki offers her version of answers to questions at the White House press briefing at which DNI Tulsi Gabbard struggled to make her case for her new report on Russian interference in the 2016 election, her apparent contribution to the Trump administration's effort to distract from Trump's Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
