Anonymous Activist Attempts to Legalize Abortion in Kentucky Lawsuit…Anyone Else Getting Roe v. Wade Déjà Vu?  

Caroline Wharton - 15 Dec 2023

A recently filed pro-abortion lawsuit in the state of Kentucky has got us experiencing serious déjà vu, and we can’t be the only ones. An anonymous woman has sued to have the right to abort her child in the Bluegrass State, and the whole thing is eerily similar to a landmark abortion decision: the infamous and recently reversed Roe v. Wade. Here’s what you need to know:  

Filed last week in a state court in Louisville, a lawsuit from an anonymous woman is “seeking class-action status to include other Kentuckians who are or will become pregnant and want to have an abortion,” according to the Associated Press. The woman is known only as Jane Doe, and the suit claimed she was around eight weeks (about two months) pregnant at time of filing. The secrecy of her identity has been paramount to this case, as her lawyers have stressed that they will “fiercely protect their client’s privacy.” 

They did update the country on one additional piece of information recently, however — and it’s one that should make you even more suspicious of their intents with this lawsuit.  

According to a statement from her attorneys, Doe has learned that her preborn child no longer has a detectable heartbeat after a medical appointment on December 8, 2023 showed no cardiac activity during an ultrasound. Sadly, this means that her baby has already died in the womb and other treatments (not direct, elective abortion) may be necessary to expel the dead child and protect maternal health. Such measures are protected in law, of course, as they do not harm life. 

Doe’s request for an abortion is therefore moot — but her legal team isn’t ready to give up yet.  

Norma McCorvey or “Jane Roe” of the Roe v. Wade ruling

Instead, they actually said they intend to proceed with the filing, not making any statement on how this change would affect their standing. For those who don’t have their Juris Doctor, legal standing is “the right of a party to challenge the conduct of another party in court,” and it matters immensely. Without proper standing, a court may refuse to review the case. In most cases, standing must include a) a legally cognizable interest, b) an injury-in-fact c) causation, and d) redressability. Learn more about this legal concept by clicking HERE.  

Clearly — though Doe’s attorneys don’t want to admit it — her standing is in question. This is likely why they are now urging other women who are pregnant and looking for an abortion in Kentucky to reach out and join the case. Such action shows their true motives, however. They don’t want to help Doe, and they’re not interested in her individually. Instead, they want to use her as a prop in their pro-abortion schemes.  

This isn’t the first time this has happened. In fact, it all seems very similar to the Roe v. Wade case which unleashed nearly 50 years of harm onto the United States. As Students for Life of America (SFLA) reported previously

SFLA President Kristan Hawkins and McCorvey

“Norma McCorvey, otherwise known as “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade, was another key player in the abortion ruling. The abortion lobby had been looking for someone to use as a pawn in their mission to legalize abortion. In her lawsuit, Norma claimed to have become pregnant as the result of rape and argued that she should therefore be allowed to have an abortion, despite the laws against abortion in her home state of Texas. She gave birth to the child and placed her with an adoptive family before Roe v. Wade’s passage… McCorvey has admitted to the many fabrications in the Roe v. Wade case, including her claim to have been raped, and became an outspoken pro-life advocate.” 

(To learn more about the now-debunked Roe decision, click HERE to read another SFLA blog entitled “Everything You Need to Know About Roe v. Wade.”  

Jane Doe of Kentucky and Jane Roe of Texas clearly have obvious and frightening parallels, and after just ending the reign of terror caused by the erroneous 1973 ruling, the pro-life movement is none too eager to see this similar case move forward. Stay tuned to the SFLA blog for updates on its progress in the court.  

READ NEXT: This “Home for the Holidays” Event Reminds Families Life-Affirming Support Exists in Their Own Neighborhood 

Share this post