Minnesota Family Council joined Family Policy Alliance, along with the Independence Law Center and 31 state organizations, in filing an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of Kerr v. Planned Parenthood. This case centers on a 2018 Executive Order issued by South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster that removed abortion clinics from the state’s list of “qualified” Medicaid providers. Instead of appealing this decision through the established Medicaid process set up by Congress, Planned Parenthood challenged the South Carolina policy in federal court.
Unfortunately, lower courts have agreed with the plaintiffs that abortion coverage should be required under Medicaid, meaning South Carolina cannot implement its ban on Medicaid funding for abortion clinics for the time being. Hence the appeal to the nation’s highest court.
In this amicus brief, Minnesota Family Council and its allies argue that the U.S. Supreme Court should reject the abortion providers’ suit because “Medicaid is a federal-state cooperative program that must be run according to uniform standards, remedies, and enforcement mechanisms to promote the intent of Congress. Permitting private litigants to sue every time a state terminates a provider’s ability to administer Medicaid services undermines this uniformity…”
On February 14th of this year, an unknown male suspect stole a shopper’s vehicle after allegedly pulling a gun on the victim. Two days later at around 12:30 p.m., two men demanded keys from another shopper at gun point. Both crimes occurred at the Rosedale Mall on Snelling Avenue. I live less than three minutes away from where these crimes took place, and like many local residents, I became more concerned for my safety. 73% of Minneapolis residents believe that crime has increased steadily over the last couple of years—and this perception is not limited to the Twin Cities. As Minnesotans start to realize this, political candidates are scrambling to find solutions ahead of the 2022 election.
This week marks the anniversary of the George Floyd’s death and the riots and violence that followed. In 2020, Minnesota experienced a violent crime surge of nearly 17% compared to 2019. Motor vehicle thefts rose by 20%, the most since 2005 according to MPR. While the Twin Cities see the most crime by far, reports from the Center for the American Experiment and Fox News have found that violent crimes are up dramatically in suburbs like Woodbury, Oakdale, and Edina. Regardless of what steps you think should be taken, we can all agree that many Minnesotans have been personally affected by the rise in crime and that this will be an election-defining issue.
On Saturday, Dr. Scott Jensen won the gubernatorial endorsement of the Minnesota GOP at the end of a drama-filled convention. This victory came after nine rounds of voting, which gradually eliminated candidates if they received less than 20% of the vote in each round. The convention, which was held in Rochester, also saw the endorsement of underdog Jim Schultz for Attorney General, Ryan Wilson for State Auditor, and Kim Crockett for Secretary of State.
On Friday, as the state GOP convention began, delegates from across Minnesota brought up the issues that most concerned them in this election. According to the Rochester Post Bulletin, the main issues for delegates were election integrity, border security, and freedom. Debbie Siefert, a delegate from Olmsted County, made known her concerns over voting rights and indoctrination in schools. Looking toward the future, Ms. Siefert hopes to “have a lot of young people wake up and get involved and really come back and fight for America.” These issues would become key talking points for candidates as they sought to gain GOP endorsement.
Five GOP gubernatorial candidates entered the convention hoping to be endorsed: Scott Jensen, Kendall Qualls, Mike Murphy, Neil Shah, and Paul Gazelka. Each of the candidates pledged to end their campaigns if they were not endorsed. Rich Stanek, who temporarily exited the campaign trail due to a car accident in Buffalo, skipped the convention and may instead participate in the August primary.
The news of the Supreme Court’s draft decision on Roe v. Wade has swept over our nation like a tidal wave. But as we await the final decision, there is much work to do. Fortunately, pro-lifers like Minnesota Representative Lisa Demuth (R-Cold Spring) have been valiantly working to create a culture of life in Minnesota. On May 3rd, Rep. Demuth took on the pro-abortion establishment when she submitted amendments to a bill in order to help protect mothers and their children.
The Health and Human Services omnibus bill in the Minnesota House seeks to make “historic investments in human services” by pouring cash into the health care workforce and certain health issues. All told, the 876-page bill proposes $478.7 million for health care services and early childhood programs and $270.7 million for health programs. With this increased spending came typical questions about responsible use of taxpayer money, but some looked beyond just finances.
Representative Lisa Demuth sought to amend the bill to include protections for women and children. First, Rep. Demuth argued that abortion clinics should have regular inspections and should have to be licensed annually. In the hearing, she remarked that “This is about the health and safety of women. We require other facilities to be licensed, other health care facilities, so why wouldn’t we expect the same of these [abortion] facilities?” In a truly sad bit of irony, tanning salons undergo inspections, but abortion centers do not.
Author Ibram X. Kendi, in his book How to be an Antiracist proposedthat “[o]ne either allows racial inequities to persevere, as a racist, or confronts racial inequities, as an antiracist.” His words took hold of the minds of many Americans sensitive to the racial tensions that seem to have grown stronger in recent years. Kendi claims that one cannot simply be non-racist, but one must also promote the rights of minorities (discriminated against) over the rights of the majority (discriminators).
Kendi’s ideas are being put to the test as the Biden Administration announced plans to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in every area of government. In an executive order, President Biden promised action from 140 different government agencies to achieve racial equity. Although this may seem like a step forward, the Administration’s proposed solution would only fight inequality with inequality.
Views on inequality run the gamut, with some conservatives denying that any racial injustice exists. However, we can plainly see how racial discrimination did exist in obvious ways in ways that still affect people today. Take the idea of redlining, one important example that was practiced here in Minnesota, not just in southern states. After President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal was signed, companies and city planners outlined areas with large minority populations and labeled them as potentially “hazardous.” As a result, these inked-in neighborhoods saw a drastic loss in investment, and a huge spike in mortgage rates. How did this effect the minority residents? As it became more difficult to buy a house, residents were forced to rent. Without ownership of a house, or the ability to benefit from the increased value of their home, black residents suffered from poverty as some white counterparts enjoyed increased home equity.
The past week has been a historic time for the Supreme Court. Although the leaked opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson has taken front and center in our national dialogue, another case was handed down this week that is a huge win for free speech. This case is of course Shurtleff v. City of Boston, which centers around the cities refusal to fly a Christian flag on their front steps.
Boston’s City Hall, which was built in 1968, has long been a place where private groups can raise a flag to support their cause. Three flagpoles stand before the Brutalist style city hall, one for the flag of the United States, on for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and one final flagpole for private groups. Over the long history of the city hall, not once has the city of Boston refused to fly a flag, until members of the group known as Camp Constitution requested to promote their heritage through a Christian symbol. At this request, the city refused on the basis that it would violate the Establishment Clause, which bans the coalition of church and state. Camp Constitution sued, and the decision found its way to the Supreme Court.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer authored the majority opinion in favor of Camp Constitution. The issue at hand was whether or not the views expressed on the exterior flags counted as government-endorsed speech. If they expressed the views of the governing system, Boston would have the authority to decide which flags to fly. Justice Breyer posited that while the history surrounding flag etiquette supported Boston’s position, “the city’s lack of meaningful involvement in the selection of flags or the crafting of their messages leads us to classify the flag raisings as private, not government, speech.” He concluded that the because of this, the city of Boston’s refusal to fly a Christian flag violated the First Amendment.
