Philadelphia Violates Hyde Amendment By Using Taxpayer Money To Fund Abortions: Lawyer
PHILADELPHIA—Thomas W. King III, special counsel for the Thomas More Society, a public interest law firm, says allocating public funds for abortion violates both the federal Hyde Amendment and the of the State of Pennsylvania of the statutory provision.
On August 16, King and three other attorneys representing Philadelphia residents filed a lawsuit against the City of Philadelphia over its allocation of $500,000 of public funds to the Pennsylvania Abortion Liberation Fund. The organization provides “emergency financial assistance” to women seeking abortions, according to its website. Pennsylvania Mayor James Kenney announced the funding Aug. 4.
“It is against the law to spend taxpayers’ money on abortions, except in very limited circumstances, under the Hyde Amendment,” King told The Epoch Times, “The Federal Hyde Amendment and the Pennsylvania’s Hyde Amendment restricts the spending of public funds on abortion, except in limited circumstances. It is very important that people understand this.
The Hyde Amendment prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for an abortion in the United States, except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. The original Hyde Amendment was passed in 1976 and named after its main sponsor, Republican Congressman Henry Hyde of Illinois.
“There have been attempts by the Democrats to overturn the Hyde Amendment, which have so far failed. It has certainly been the subject of much discussion across the United States,” King continued.
“The Thomas More Society, which I represent in this matter, with the consent of our clients, is very interested in preserving the Hyde Amendment, preserving the Pennsylvania Hyde Amendment, and protecting taxpayers’ money from Philadelphia. that way.”
Pennsylvania’s version of the Hyde Amendment also prohibits public funding
King explained, “In Pennsylvania we have a similar law, usually called the Pennsylvania Hyde Amendment, [which states that] abortions cannot be financed by taxpayers’ money. The only exceptions are to save the life of the mother or for rape or incest. Other than that, taxpayers’ money cannot be spent in this way to pay for people’s abortions.
The Pennsylvanian version of the Hyde Amendment, to which King refers, is the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Lawwhich states the following with respect to public funds: “No commonwealth funds and no federal funds which are appropriated by the commonwealth shall be expended by any state or local government agency for the performance of an abortion”, except for pregnancies resulting from incest or rape, or to save the life of the mother.
Another law mentioned in the lawsuit as being violated is the Pennsylvania Human Services Code, which similarly states: “Since it is the public policy of the Commonwealth to favor childbirth rather than abortion, no Commonwealth funds and no federal funds that are appropriated by the commonwealth shall be expended by any state or local government agency for the performance of an abortion” – with exceptions similar to those stipulated in the Pennsylvania abortion control law . (pdf)
King said he thinks a lawyer’s responsibility is to uphold the law: “I try to follow my life, uphold the law, represent people who want to uphold the law and challenge things. which, in my opinion, are not legally accurate or correct.”
The plaintiffs in this case, Charles P. Kuhar, Sr., and Theresa M. Kuhar, are active in the pro-life movement in Philadelphia.
A hearing is scheduled for August 31 at the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia.
The Epoch Times has reached out to Philadelphia Mayor Kenney for comment. The mayor’s communications office responded, “As this is ongoing litigation, we are unable to comment.”