SBA List's Motion to Dismiss Denied
WASHINGTON, August 1, 2011 /
Christian Newswire/ -- Today, Judge Timothy S. Black ruled that there was no taxpayer funding of abortion in the health care reform bill dismissing the Susan B. Anthony List's motion for summary judgment in former Congressman Steve Driehaus' defamation lawsuit against the SBA List. At issue is whether or not the SBA List's accusations against Congressman Driehaus during the 2010 Election "inflicted grievous harm to his reputation, including his character and personal integrity, subjected him to public contempt and hatred, and adversely affected him in his profession as a public servant."
"It was unfortunate that a vote for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was mischaracterized as a pro-abortion vote and used as a partisan tool to defeat pro-life Democrats, like Steve Driehaus." said Kristen Day, Executive Director of Democrats For Life of America. "The ruling will not correct the injustices done to good Members, like Steve, but it also vindicates the other pro-life Members who were also unjustly targeted, including Sen. Bob Casey (PA), Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (PA), Rep. Jerry Costello (IL), Rep. Joe Donnelly (IN), Rep. Brad Ellsworth (IN), Rep. Paul Kanjorski (PA), Rep. Dale Kildee (MI) Rep. Alan Mollohan (WV), Sen. Ben Nelson (NE), Rep. Jim Oberstar (MN), Rep. Nick Rahall (WV), Rep. Bart Stupak (MI) and Rep. Charlie Wilson (OH)."
At the heart of the debate is whether accusations by the SBA List that Congressman Driehaus voted for taxpayer funding of abortion is protected speech. The Ohio Election Commission found probable cause that the SBA List "violated two of Ohio's false statement laws". The SBA List ignored the Ohio Election Commission ruling and continued their effort to flood his district with their message. The SBA List contends that their statements, whether they are true or false, are protected speech because it was their "opinion" not "fact".
Judge Black disagreed and found that, "because each allegedly defamatory statement was expressly referred to as "a fact" or "the truth," any reasonable reader would understand that the taxpayer funded statements conveyed information of a factual nature." He pointed to several SBA List communications that reaffirmed that their accusations about taxpayer funding of abortion were facts, not merely their opinion.
The Judge further stated that "Whether it is possible, under contingent circumstances, that at some point in the future, upon the execution of x, y and z, that the PPACA would not prevent taxpayer funded abortion is entirely different from providing for "tax-payer funded abortion" The express language of the PPACA does not provide for tax-payer funding abortion. That is a fact, and it is clear on its face."
