Lousiana's legislature passed a bill to outlaw the mailing of abortion-inducing drugs



A measure outlawing the mailing of abortion-inducing drugs has passed the Louisiana legislature and is headed to the state’s governor, John Bel Edwards, for consideration.

Gov. Edwards is a Democrat who has previously signed pro-life bills that pass the state house into law. The Epoch Times reported that if the bill is signed it will go into effect on August 1.

The bill, S.B. 388, authored by Republican State Senator Sharon Hewitt underwent a series of amendments in the Louisiana House of Representatives before being approved 31-1 by the state Senate this past Friday.

If signed into law by Edwards, the measure will make it a crime for someone to knowingly cause an abortion by “delivering, dispensing, distributing, or providing a pregnant woman with an abortion-inducing drug” if the person providing the chemical abortive is not a doctor licensed under state law to administer the drug to women.

The bill does not, however, penalize women who seek abortions.

The bill defines chemical abortives and abortion-inducing drugs as “any drug or chemical, or any combination of drugs or chemicals, or any other substance when used with the intent to cause an abortion, including but not limited to RU-486, the Mifeprex regimen, misoprostol (Cyotec), or methotrexate.”

The proposed legislation also that the term “abortion-inducing drug” excludes any “contraceptive, an emergency contraceptive, or the use of methotrexate to treat an ectopic pregnancy.”

According to the bill’s text, if a person is found guilty of delivering, dispending, distributing, or providing chemical abortives, they “shall be imprisoned at hard labor” and could face hefty fines.

The bill states, “Any person who knowingly performs an abortion by means of an abortion-inducing drug in violation of this Section shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than one nor more than five years, fined not less than five thousand nor more than fifty thousand dollars, or both.”

It also makes a distinct differentiation between providing the drugs for a woman to conduct an abortion and someone who “knowingly performs an abortion by means of abortion-inducing drug[s]” subsequently harming the expectant mother in the process.

The bill states, “Any person who knowingly performs an abortion by means of abortion-inducing drug in violation of this Section that results in the death or serious bodily injury of the pregnant woman shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than five nor more than ten years, fined not less than ten thousand nor more than seventy-five thousand dollars, or both.”

Pro-abortion protesters pledge 'summer of rage' during nationwide Saturday protests



Thousands of pro-abortion advocates rallied across the country on Saturday to express their anger over the U.S. Supreme Court’s potential repeal of Roe v. Wade.

The demonstrations come in response to the leak of a draft majority opinion, which has since been authenticated by Chief Justice John Roberts, indicating that the Supreme Court is prepared to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Reuters reported that the mass demonstration’s organizers are saying these gatherings mark the start of a potential “summer of rage” if the Supreme Court moves forward with repealing Roe.

The “Bans Off Our Bodies” gatherings were planned by Planned Parenthood, Women’s March, and other pro-abortion organizations. The groups organized more than 400 protests for Saturday.

If Roe is repealed, several states are expected to implement additional restrictions on abortion while others are expected to vastly expand abortion access. A repeal of Roe would not result in a federal ban on abortion. It would, however, allow each state to establish its own legislative approach to the matter.

On Saturday, there were large gatherings in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and more. There were also accompanying counterprotests led by pro-life groups.

At the protests in Washington, D.C., protestors gathered around the Washington Monument at the National Mall where they waved placards with messages condemning the Supreme Court and expressing solidarity with the pro-abortion movement.

In downtown Brooklyn, thousands of pro-abortion advocates crossed the Brooklyn Bridge into Manhattan.

Elizabeth Holtzman, an 80-year-old attendee of the protest who represented New York in Congress from 1973 to 1981, said that the leaked majority opinion “treats women as objects, as less than full human beings.”

In Los Angeles, outside of Los Angeles City Hall, Malcolm DeCesare, a 34-year-old intensive care unit nurse, said that making abortion illegal could put the lives of women who seek alternatives at risk.

At a pro-abortion protest in Atlanta, Georgia, more than 400 people assembled in a small park in front of the state’s capitol while a much smaller group of counter protestors peacefully demonstrated on a nearby sidewalk.

One 23-year-old counter protestor held a sign that read “Stop Child Sacrifice.”

This counter protestor said, “Jesus had just a small group, but his message was more powerful. I’m hoping to plant some seeds in their hearts to change minds.”

Despite the sizable protests, recent polling suggests that overturning Roe stands to benefit Republicans in the upcoming 2022 midterm elections.

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signs law criminalizing the distribution of abortion pills through mail



Tennessee’s Republican Governor Bill Lee signed a bill into law on Thursday that increases criminal penalties for anyone found to be distributing chemical abortive pills through either telehealth programs or the mail.

The Tennessean reported that this new legislation will prohibit any remote distribution of chemically abortive pharmaceuticals. However, the law will not prohibit the prescription of such substances in person by a physician.

After prescribing chemical abortives to patients, physicians are not required to monitor them during or after they take the drugs, but they are responsible for a ensuring a follow-up appointment with the patient within two weeks. Should this procedure not be followed, the legislation stipulates that they will be committing a Class E felony punishable by a fine up to $50,000.

Chemical abortive pills are increasingly common among women seeking to terminate early-term pregnancies up to 10 weeks. In 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the delivery of these drugs, along with telehealth being allowed to dispense the pills amid access concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists previously endorsed chemical abortions as a safe procedure.

According to the most recent available data, more than 75% of abortions in Tennessee occurred within the first 10 weeks of pregnancy in 2018.

The new Tennessee legislation mirrors pro-life initiatives that have gained traction across the U.S. in recent months following the FDA’s approval of chemical abortive distribution and in the days since a draft majority opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court leaked indicating that the nation’s highest court was preparing to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The leaked draft decision comes from a case pertaining to a challenge to a pro-life law in Mississippi.

Chief Justice John Roberts issued a statement confirming the authenticity of the leaked draft opinion. Roberts said that the draft opinion was not final and that the court’s consensus could change.

In 2019, the state of Tennessee passed a law that would automatically ban abortion in the state if the Supreme Court overturns or alters Roe v. Wade. The law would make it a felony for a doctor to perform an abortion, while the women seeking abortions would be exempt from prosecution.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, a leftist nonprofit organization that is, according to its website, “committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights worldwide,” more than 20 states are prepared to implement additional abortion restrictions should Roe v. Wade be overturned.

Amazon will reimburse employees $4,000 if they cross state lines to get an abortion



Amazon is committing to financing the abortions of its employees.

On Monday, the second-largest private employer in the U.S. told its staff that it will pay up to $4,000 annually in travel expenses for “non-life-threatening medical treatments including abortions.”

Reuters reported that Amazon’s decision to subsidize its employees' abortions places the online mega-retailer on a growing list of large corporations with similar policies on the books. Citigroup Inc. and Yelp Inc. both announced that they would subsidize the abortion process for their employees in response to Republican-backed state laws limiting abortion access.

In a similar vein, the popular ride-sharing companies Uber and Lyft previously vowed to cover the legal fees for drivers in Texas who encounter legal difficulties for driving women to abortion clinics, Fortune reported.

The company’s new benefit will have retroactive coverage and is available to both its U.S. employees and their covered dependents who are enrolled in either the Premera or Aetna health plans. The reimbursement benefits are available to employees at all levels of the company. Warehouse workers and executives alike can be reimbursed for expenses incurred in their pursuit of an abortion.

However, in order to qualify for the reimbursement, the individuals seeking to receive an abortion must travel more than 100 miles.

Amazon announced that it would start financing abortions the same day that it stopped offering U.S.-based employees paid time off when they get diagnosed with COVID-19.

On Monday, a draft decision indicating that the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to overturnRoe v. Wade was leaked to the media.

The draft is of the court’s majority opinion and is written by Associate Justice Samuel Alito. It is believed that the opinion had already circulated inside the court prior to it being leaked.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Alito wrote.

“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division,” Alito continued.

The draft decision is related to an outstanding challenge against a piece of pro-life legislation out of Mississippi.

“The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions,” Alito concludes. “On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of common law until 1973.”

Joe Manchin won't support a SCOTUS nominee if hearings are held too close to a presidential election: 'I'm not going to be hypocritical'



Joe Manchin, the highly controversial senator from West Virginia, said that he would not support filling another Supreme Court vacancy should another seat on the high court became open near a presidential election.

Manchin just clarified this to reporters, saying he was referring to a presidential election, not midterms. His initial comment was confusing because he voted to confirm Kavanaugh right before the 2018 midtermshttps://twitter.com/alexanderbolton/status/1493342904764579846\u00a0\u2026
— Seung Min Kim (@Seung Min Kim) 1644879012

Per the popular political blog HotAir, Sen. Manchin refuses to be hypocritical and is dedicated to applying to a consistent standard for all nominees regardless of who nominated them.

“I’m not going to be hypocritical on that,” Manchin said, “If it would come a week or two weeks before [a presidential election] like it did with our last Supreme Court nominee, I think that’s the time it should go to the next election.”

Manchin is referring to the 2020 nomination of now Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett whom Manchin ultimately did not vote to confirm.

After the Senate voted to confirm Barrett to the Supreme Court, Manchin issued a statement on his website that said, “Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans chose a dangerous, partisan path to push through the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett eight days before this year’s November 3rd election further politicizing the highest court in the land.”

“I cannot support the nomination of Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court of the United States on the eve of a Presidential election,” the statement continued, “It is simple — this nomination should have waited until after the election.”

Previously, Manchin indicated that he is open to supporting whomever President Joe Biden nominates to replace Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court so long as that person has the requisite experience for the job.

In late January, Manchin told a local West Virginian radio show, “Whoever [Biden] puts up will have experience, and we’ll be able to judge them off of that, but as far as just the philosophical beliefs, no, that will not prohibit me from supporting somebody.”

The senator’s indifference to a nominee’s worldview is not unique to this instance.

In 2018, Manchin voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court despite public outcry and ruthless media scrutiny over his nomination.

I will vote to support Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh.pic.twitter.com/1FfuMTOZz8
— Senator Joe Manchin (@Senator Joe Manchin) 1538769291

While running in the 2020 Democratic primary race, then-candidate Biden committed to nominating the first black woman to the Supreme Court.

In March 2021, White House press secretary Jen Psaki reaffirmed the now-president’s decision by stating that Biden is “absolutely” committed to nominating an “African-American woman to the Supreme Court.”

Biden’s prioritization of race and gender in his nominee selection process has earned considerable scrutiny and condemnation from people across the political spectrum.

SCOTUS, Are You in Favor of Freedom?

SCOTUS, Are You in Favor of Freedom?

Chuck Schumer Flips On Puerto Rican Statehood

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer flipped on his position over Puerto Rican statehood this week, declaring his opposition to the idea after endorsing it.
EXCLUSIVE! Texas AG on What You Can Do To #stopthesteal | Louder With Crowder

EXCLUSIVE! Texas AG on What You Can Do To #stopthesteal | Louder With Crowder

Democrats Worked Hard To Put Amy Coney Barrett On The Supreme Court

Had Democrats given Trump's judicial nominees due respect and consideration, they could have had more influence over Barrett's nomination process.

WATCH: Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed, leftists MELT DOWN



On today's show, Steven examines the overnight rioting and looting in Philadelphia after another police shooting, and then looks at the top leftist meltdowns over the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett. Then he examines YouTube's new fact-checking policies and how they favor Joe Biden. Finally, he offers a take on Biden's backers, and how most are establishment elitists, contrasted with Trump's support among small business owners and the working class.


Use promo code LWC to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Steven Crowder?

To enjoy more of Steven's uncensored late-night comedy that's actually funny, join Mug Club — the only place for all of Crowder uncensored and on demand.