A petition for a referendum that would have made people receiving or performing abortions guilty of murder in Oklahoma will not continue due to a ruling by the Oklahoma Supreme Court on March 22.
Oklahoma’s ACLU chapter challenged the referendum, and the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the ballot measure was unconstitutional, according to Tulsa World.
Russell Hunter, the Oklahoma man who began the petition, told the local newspaper that he expected the court’s ruling.
“I am an American citizen,” Hunter said. “I am a Christian, so I should love my neighbors as I love myself. That would be all my neighbors, even my unborn neighbors and should uphold the constitution, and the constitution says no person shall be deprived of the right to life.”
Brady Henderson, legal director for the Oklahoma ACLU, said the state court simply reaffirmed constitutional law in its decision.
The ACLU’s mission is fight for individual rights and liberties, but the group has consistently fought against efforts to protect the rights of the unborn.
Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.
Moreover, the ACLU has often fought against pro-life people for exercising their conscience and refusing to kill unborn babies. On March 14, LifeNews provided an update on the ACLU’s efforts to force a Catholic health system, Trinity Health Corporation, to perform abortions against its religious beliefs.
However, even without the efforts of pro-abortion organizations like the ACLU, bills and referendums like the one shut down in Oklahoma stand little chance of becoming law. This includes Oklahoma Senate Bill 1118 introduced by State Sen. Joe Silk earlier in March that had the same goal, and would make abortion first-degree murder by law.
Such efforts, though admirable crusades for the pro-life cause, lack the chance to remain law due to the precedence of Roe v. Wade, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Constitution includes a right to abortion.
In order for strict abortion bans to be kept law, a pro-life Supreme Court needs to overturn key aspects of the now 43-year-old case. This became more difficult with the recent and unexpected death of the staunchly pro-life Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, and would become even more difficult if a pro-abortion justice replaces him.
Though President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland, has not been involved with cases that make clear his position on issues of life, pro-life groups claim that any nominee by President Obama cannot be depended on to consider the rights of unborn babies. After all, Obama has already appointed two pro-abortion justices and is considered by many to be the most pro-abortion president in U.S. history.