America used to praise people for saving lives. Now, it hauls them before a congressional committee and demands to know why anyone would intervene. That’s because Scott Lloyd is a member of the Trump administration, and he — like several others — tried to stop the killing of the innocent baby at the center of the Jane Doe controversy. But since the baby was unborn, and supposedly “unwanted,” liberals don’t see the heroism in that — only the political consequences.
At a hearing last Thursday, Mr. Lloyd, who works for Health and Human Services in the Office of Refugee Resettlement, defended himself against allegations that he’s “coercing” the illegal pregnant mothers in his care not to have abortions. Although President Obama was quite content letting taxpayers fork over their hard-earned dollars to help these women kill their innocent unborn children, the Trump administration takes a decidedly pro-life stance, which, unlike Obama’s, happens to be in keeping with U.S. law.
In a case that was fast-tracked through the courts, the president’s team argued that America isn’t a sanctuary nation for abortion. But unfortunately, a handful of activist judges put our country on the path toward that when they granted a young 17-year-old’s abortion. Answering a barrage of Democrats’ questions, Lloyd was forced to answer questions about why he was upholding the law. “It is extremely troubling to me,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) insisted, “what is happening, and I think you are far overreaching over your expertise.”
The 38-year-old Lloyd refused to respond to the criticism. His responsibility, he explained, is to make “good choices on their behalf.” Back in March, he explained to others in the department, “Often these girls start to regret abortion.” In the dozens of cases where minor detainees were pregnant, he instructed staff to offer compassionate alternatives. “Clinicians should work to identify any pressures that might be leading her to desire termination (does she feel pressure to get to work, is there emotional abuse, etc.), and what is leading to her sadness and anger.”
Now, two weeks after the baby’s life was ended, the case surrounding it is anything but. Justice Department attorneys, who were blindsided by the early morning abortion, blasted ACLU attorneys representing her for “misleading” them about the girl’s appointment. They’re outraged that the ACLU “did not alert government lawyers that the teen’s abortion would take place a day earlier than expected,” essentially short-circuiting their appeal.
“After informing Justice Department attorneys that the procedure would occur on October 26th, Jane Doe’s attorneys scheduled the abortion for the early morning hours of October 25th, thereby thwarting Supreme Court review,” Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley. “The government asked to be kept informed of the timing of Ms. Doe’s abortion procedure, and one of respondent’s counsel agreed to do so,” the Department argues. “Although Ms. Doe’s representatives informed the government of the change in timing, they did not inform the government of the other two developments — which kept the government in the dark about when Ms. Doe was scheduled to have an abortion.”
Obviously, the Trump administration wants to stop this from happening again. Although nothing can bring back that unborn baby, the president and his DOJ should be applauded for their vigorous defense of the case. As Solicitor General Noel Francisco argued in a filing with the Supreme Court, the ACLU’s conduct here requires the whole case to be dismissed. That would be good news, since dozens of pregnant teens pass through the government’s custody every year. Clearly, this should not be the case that sets the precedent for future moms. Either way, the ACLU absolutely must be held accountable for deceiving U.S. officials. As FRC’s Travis Weber points out, “What is deeply scary, and beyond the legal banter of this case, is that the ACLU apparently had such a fervent desire to see Ms. Doe’s baby killed that it chose to walk in the shadows of concealment and deception to do so.”
Of course, the irony of this whole debacle — including Scott Lloyd’s appearance on Capitol Hill — is that the Left thinks it’s perfectly acceptable to promote their agenda when they’re in power. But the second they’re in the minority they claim it’s unconstitutional for conservatives to do the same. What part of democratic government don’t they understand? The American people rejected liberals’ destructive and perverted policies at the ballot box last November. That’s how the country course-corrects: through elections.
Obviously, the political whiplash has been severe. Not since Ronald Reagan replaced Jimmy Carter has there been such a contrast in leaders and their agendas. In fact, I would argue that you’d probably have to go back to Andrew Jackson to see such a stark divide between the political ideologies of one administration to another. But the bottom line is that a sufficient number of voters were tired of Obama’s radical liberalism to elect Donald Trump. And since then, the Trump administration has been working to find a political and cultural equilibrium — not by stopping Obama’s policies, but reversing them. And the latter is what’s shocking the liberal establishment.
As is evidenced by congressional Republicans on Obamacare, the GOP rarely rolls back the destructive and costly policies and programs of their predecessors. At best, they slow them down, tweak them on the margins, or — if they’re feeling bold — halt them. But they almost never undid them — until Donald Trump was elected. His administration is doing what the people want. And unfortunately for liberals, it’s the opposite of their agenda.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.