Hawley Said “I Hope That We'll Get A Result That Will Overturn Roe Vs. Wade” And Called Roe Vs Wade An “Unjust Opinion.” According to The Elijah Haahr Show, “So I hope it'll fail, Elijah, and I hope that we'll get a result that will overturn Roe vs. Wade, because it's a terrible opinion. It's one of the worst opinions in the course history. It's an unjust opinion. And I hope we'll see it overturn this year.” [The Elijah Haahr Show Podcast via Soundcloud, 6/1/22]
**Sen. Hawley Joined Sens. Lee And Cruz In An Amicus Brief For Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Which Called For The Supreme Court To Overturn Roe v. Wade And Planned Parenthood v. Casey. **According to a press release from Sen. Hawley, “U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), along with Senators Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), filed an amicus brief in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, urging the Court to overrule its decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. The brief argues that the Supreme Court’s abortion jurisprudence finds no basis in the Constitution, and points out that the ‘undue burden’ standard in particular has resulted in contradictory outcomes, disarray in the lower courts, and judicial lawmaking. The Senators urged the Court to overrule Casey and Roe and return the question of abortion legislation to the states and the people.” [Sen. Josh Hawley, Press Release, 7/26/21]
Hawley Said Characterized The Burger-Court’s Original Decision In Roe As Saying That “The People Are Too Stupid To Make These Decisions Themselves” And SCOTUS Should Make The “All The Decisions.” According to Fox News, “Hawley characterized the Roe decision as the then-Warren Burger-led court saying, ‘The people are too stupid to make these decisions themselves.’ ‘Nine justices wearing robes: They should be the ones making all the decisions,’ he went on. ‘That's not what the Constitution says, – and that's why we need to get back to trusting the people and actually enforcing the Constitution.’” [Fox News, 5/3/22]
Hawley Claimed “Overturning Roe Is About Putting Democracy Back In The Driver’s Seat.” According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “Joe Biden claims to believe in democracy but he doesn’t trust the people. Overturning Roe is about putting democracy back in the driver’s seat. The people should be in charge, not nine lawyers wearing robes” [Twitter, @HawleyMO, 5/3/22]
Hawley Rejected Original Roe Decision Saying “That’s Not What The Constitution Says” And “We Need To Get Back To Trusting The People And Actually Enforcing The Constitution.” According to Fox News, “Hawley characterized the Roe decision as the then-Warren Burger-led court saying, ‘The people are too stupid to make these decisions themselves.’ ‘Nine justices wearing robes: They should be the ones making all the decisions,’ he went on. ‘That's not what the Constitution says, – and that's why we need to get back to trusting the people and actually enforcing the Constitution.’” [Fox News, 5/3/22]
Hawley Called Roe V. Wade A “Illegitimate Decision.” According to Roll Call, “Barrett, the newest justice, is also the most untested on her approach to abortion while on the Supreme Court. As with other Supreme Court nominees, Barrett repeatedly told senators during her confirmation that she would not comment on her view on abortion rights or the Roe and Casey precedents. But some Republicans were open that they backed Barrett for her stance on abortion. Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, a former Supreme Court clerk, said on the Senate floor ahead of the confirmation vote that Barrett is ‘the mostly openly pro-life judicial nominee to the Supreme Court in my lifetime’ and someone ‘who has been open in her criticism of that illegitimate decision, Roe vs. Wade.’” [Roll Call, 11/29/21]
Hawley Said He Was Appalled By Roe v. Wade. According to Life Site Now, “‘My view is that Roe v. Wade had no basis in law or fact,’ summarized Hawley. ‘The legal reasoning and deadly effect of the case appall me.’” [Life Site Now, 2/11/16]
Hawley Tweeted That It Was Time To End Roe v. Wade. According to Josh Hawley Twitter, “Folks arriving in nation’s capital for March for Life. 43 yrs of Roe is 43 yrs too long. #EndRoe #MarchForLife” [Josh Hawley Twitter, 1/21/16]
Hawley Called The Leaked Opinion “Voluminously Researched, Tightly Argued, And Morally Powerful.” According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “I will say, if this is the Court’s opinion, it’s a heck of an opinion. Voluminously researched, tightly argued, and morally powerful” [Twitter, @HawleyMO, 5/2/22]
Hawley Said The Leaked Alito Draft Was “A Really Good Opinion” And That He Looked Forward To The Campaign Debate. According to ABC News, “Other Republican senators slammed the unusual leak of the high-profile draft opinion as an attempt to bully the court, even as they celebrated its contents. Chief Justice John Roberts, confirming the authenticity of the leaked draft opinion, on Tuesday ordered an investigation into the leak. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said the leaked draft from Justice Samuel Alito ’is a really good opinion.’” [ABC News, 5/3/22]
Following Leak Of Draft Opinion, Hawley Called For Roe To Be Overruled. According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “No turning back now. Roe must be overruled” [Twitter, @HawleyMO, 5/3/22]
Hawley Claimed That If The Leaked Roe Opinion Was The Opinion Of The Court, It Would Be “One Of The Greatest Opinion In Supreme Court History.” According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “If this is the opinion of the Court, it will be one of the greatest opinions in Supreme Court history. It will save millions of lives” [Twitter, @HawleyMO, 5/3/22]
Following The Leaked Decision, Hawley Asserted That “Roe And Casey Were Wrong The Day They Were Decided, And It’s Long Past Time For The Court To Overrule Them.” According to a Fox News Op-ed by Hawley, “Roe and Casey were wrong the day they were decided, and it’s long past time for the Court to overrule them, come what may.“ [Fox News Op-ed, 5/4/22]
Hawley Called The Draft Opinion “Powerful” And “Everything A Constitutionalist Could Hope For.” According to a Fox News Op-ed by Hawley, “Justice Alito’s draft majority opinion is powerful, overturning Roe and returning the question of abortion to the people. The opinion is everything a constitutionalist could hope for.” [Fox News Op-ed, 5/4/22]
Hawley Called On The Court To “Stay The Course, And Defy The Left-Wing Pressure” And “Issue Its Opinion Immediately So That Far-Left Agitators Cannot Try To Obstruct Official Proceedings.” According to a Fox News Op-Ed, “This time around, the Court’s majority must stay the course, and defy the left-wing pressure. In fact, the Court should issue its opinion immediately so that far-left agitators cannot try to obstruct official proceedings. The longer the Court waits, the more tricks Democrats can attempt. Justice Alito’s draft is a model of legal and historical clarity, one that devastates the false notion that a ‘right to abortion’ is deeply rooted in our national history and tradition.” [Fox News, 5/4/22]
Hawley Urged The Court To “Issue The Decision Now.” According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “The Court should not abide this coordinated assault by the Left. Issue the decision now” [Twitter, @HawleyMO, 5/2/22]
Hawley Said That If Roe Were Overturned Hawley Said We Are Going To Have Conversations About How To Support Women Through Pregnancies And Those Struggling With Raising Kids. According to ABC 17, “ABC 17 News spoke with Senator Josh Hawley (R - MO) on what could happen if Roe v. Wade was overturned. ‘If Roe is indeed overturned then I think we're going to have a great and important conversation nationally about how we support women through the course of their pregnancies, how we can help families and those who want to have children but can't, and those who are struggling to make it with their kids. I think we do need to talk about adoption and how we make it easier, and how we make it simpler and how we make it fairer.’” [ABC 17, 5/4/22]
Hawley Refused To Explicitly Support Expanding Governmental Support Systems For Mothers Saying “It’d Be A Great Debate To Have.” According to KSDK, “Maxwell: ‘CBS News noted just last night that of the 26 states positioned to restrict or outright ban abortion, near all of them do not provide paid family leave, or do not expand Medicaid to offer health insurance throughout postpartum for the mother. If governments, state or federal are going to require women to go through with delivering an unplanned pregnancy, perhaps one they don't want, should then government do more to make that path easier for them?’ Hawley: ‘Well, if you're asking me about what the states should do, that's going to be up to the states and the voters in the states, and I think that says it should be. I mean, here's the bottom line on Roe: Roe created a constitutional right that doesn't exist, and it took out of the people's hands their decisions, their choices as it relates to abortion and to life. I mean, this is this is a question on which the Constitution is silent. And so it's up to the people to decide it. And I imagine that you're going to see a lot of different approaches in different states. And that's fine. I mean, we're going to have a national debate on this issue. And we'll have it state by state, which is exactly as it should be. And so I look forward to seeing how that debate goes. I'm 100% pro life myself. So I'd support measures that support life and that keep children safe, the unborn safe, who I think are the most vulnerable among us. But I think it'd be a great debate to have.’” [KSDK, 5/5/22]
Hawley Argued That There Should Be More Emphasis On Other Options Besides Abortion Like Adoption And Stated That “Adoption Needs To Become Much Easier.” According to KHQA, “U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) recently discussed his thoughts with KTVO on Roe v. Wade potentially being overturned by the Supreme Court. Hawley believes that the people should decide what they want the rules to be on abortion. Should Roe v. Wade be overturned, Hawley believes there needs to be more emphasis on other options women may use. One of those options is adoption. ‘Adoption needs to become much easier,’ Sen. Hawley said. ‘It needs to be facilitated both for those who want to adopt and for those that want to give children up for adoption. So, I think there will be work to do in those areas to make sure that folks who want to have babies and to adopt babies are able to do so and those who want to put them up for adoption can do so as well.’” [KHQA, 5/10/22]
Hawley Claimed That If Roe v. Wade Were Overturned We Would See More Children Of Color In The World. According To KSDK, “Maxwell: ‘As you know, Missouri is positioned to outlaw all abortion, including those immediately upon conception, once Roe is eventually overturned. Statistics show that Black women and women of color are far more likely than white women to seek an abortion. Why do you think that is?’ Hawley: ‘I don't know the answer to that question, but I do celebrate the fact that if Roe vs. Wade is overturned that we'll see many, many more children of color in this world, which I think is a wonderful thing.’” [KSDK, 5/5/22]
Hawley Claimed That Codifying Roe v. Wade Into Law Would “Disenfranchise Every Voter In Missouri.” According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “The Democrats’ radical pro-abortion bill would disenfranchise every voter in Missouri, overturn our state laws - and give the power to DC Democrats” [Hawley, @HawleyMO, 5/11/22]
July 2020: Hawley Stated That He Would Not Vote For Any Supreme Court Nominee Who Would Not State That Roe v. Wade Was Wrongly Decided On The Record Before Their Nomination. According to the Washington Post, “That Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Sunday that he would not support any nominee for the Supreme Court unless they had publicly stated before their nomination that Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that established federal protection for abortion, was ‘wrongly decided.’ ‘I will vote only for those Supreme Court nominees who have explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade is wrongly decided,’ Hawley said in an interview with The Washington Post. ‘By explicitly acknowledged, I mean on the record and before they were nominated.’ Hawley added: ‘I don’t want private assurances from candidates. I don’t want to hear about their personal views, one way or another. I’m not looking for forecasts about how they may vote in the future or predications. I don’t want any of that. I want to see on the record, as part of their record, that they have acknowledged in some forum that Roe v. Wade, as a legal matter, is wrongly decided.”’ [Washington Post, 7/26/20]
Day After Ginsburg Death, Hawley Tweeted That Republican Senators Should Use The Same Test. According to the Kansas City Star, “A day after Ginsburg’s death, Hawley was on Twitter reasserting his pledge and calling “on my fellow Republican senators to take the same stand.” Hawley’s demand for explicit opposition to Roe promises to elevate the issue of abortion in hearings that will be closely watched by activists on both sides.” [Kansas City Star, 9/30/20]
October, 2020: Despite Trump Claiming Her Views On Roe Were Unknown, Hawley Argued That Amy Coney Barrett Implicitly Met His Standard Based On His Reading Of Her Record. According to the Kansas City Star, “Several months before Ginsburg’s death created a vacancy on the court, Hawley announced on the Senate floor that he would only support Supreme Court nominees who ‘explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, the day it was decided.’ But as Barrett moves through the contentious confirmation process, Hawley appears to have moved away from requiring an explicit acknowledgment in favor of an implicit one based on his reading of her record. Hawley has repeatedly said that Barrett meets this standard in her view of the 1973 Roe decision, which legalized abortion nationally. He was asked Thursday as he sat alongside the nominee how he squared this claim with President Donald Trump’s assertion in Tuesday’s debate that the judge’s views of Roe are unknown. The senator drew a distinction between considering the case wrongly decided and voting to overturn it in the future. ‘I won’t speak for the president. I did watch the debate. I think if memory serves, Joe Biden just said Judge Barrett— who I believe soon will be Justice Barrett— would vote a certain way, would vote to overturn,’ Hawley told reporters, who were allowed inside a brief portion of the meeting. ‘And the president said, ‘You don’t know,’ which I think is consistent. I mean, I haven’t heard Judge Barrett pledge her vote on any case. She can’t do that.’” [Kansas City Star, 10/1/20]
October 2020: Amy Coney Barrett Refused To Directly Answer Questions About Her Stance On Roe v. Wade. According to the Kansas City Star, “Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett refused to directly answer questions Tuesday about her stance on Roe v. Wade, failing to hit a benchmark once set by Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley. During the second day of confirmation hearings, Barrett was asked by California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein multiple times whether she agreed with the late Justice Antonin Scalia, Barrett’s mentor, that Roe v. Wade, which established a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion, was wrongly decided. Barrett, a federal appeals judge, cited Justice Elena Kagan, one of President Obama’s appointees, in saying she ‘was not going to grade precedent or give it a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down.’ ‘It would be wrong of me to do that as a sitting judge,’ said Barrett. ‘Whether I say I love it or I hate it, it signals to litigants that I might tilt one way or another in a pending case.’ added that she has never promised to rule a certain way on specific cases. ‘I’m not willing to make a deal — not with the committee, not with the president,’ she said. ‘I’m independent.’” [Kansas City Star, 10/13/20]
Hawley Said He Would Never Defend Roe As Attorney General. According to Life Site Now, “As attorney general, Hawley would swear to uphold all of the state’s laws. Asked whether he would defend any state laws that allow abortions, the candidate said that ‘the problem in Missouri at present is not that our laws are pro-abortion, but that pro-life laws are not vigorously enforced. My first order of business as attorney general will be to enforce the state’s laws as they are written, beginning with ending the sweetheart deals for Planned Parenthood.’ ‘That said, if pro-life advocates challenge aspects of Missouri law, I would look for every feasible way to accommodate their challenge, whether by settling the case or admitting error. I will never defend Roe or the ‘right’ to an abortion. Make no mistake: people will know precisely where I stand on the offense of abortion. I will continue to be a relentless advocate for statutes and measures to end abortion in Missouri.’” [Life Site News, 2/11/16]
Hawley Said He Would Work Hard To Enforce The Anti-Choice Laws In Missouri He Felt Were Not Enforced Enough. According to Life Site Now, “As attorney general, Hawley would swear to uphold all of the state’s laws. Asked whether he would defend any state laws that allow abortions, the candidate said that ‘the problem in Missouri at present is not that our laws are pro-abortion, but that pro-life laws are not vigorously enforced. My first order of business as attorney general will be to enforce the state’s laws as they are written, beginning with ending the sweetheart deals for Planned Parenthood.’” [Life Site News, 2/11/16]
Hawley Called The Hyde Amendment “Common-Sense.” According to Hawley’s official Twitter, “It looks like House Dems are removing the Hyde Amendment, a common-sense amendment overwhelmingly supported by Americans. We must continue to stand for the dignity, value, and promise of every life until the day that every single life is welcome and protected. #HydeSavesLives” [Twitter, @SenHawleyPress, 7/15/21]
Hawley Condemned The American Rescue Plan Because He Claimed It Gave “Millions Of Federal Dollars To Abortion Providers” And Ignored The Hyde Amendment. According to the Daily Caller, “‘To call the bill the Democrats passed ‘Covid relief’ is generous,’ Republican Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley told the DCNF. ‘What does ignoring decades of precedent set by the Hyde Amendment and giving millions of federal dollars to abortion providers have to do with beating a pandemic?’” [Daily Caller, 3/10/21]
Hawley Compared The Pro-Life Movement To Abolitionists Fighting Against The “Moral Evil Of Slavery” That Is Abortion. According to the Daily Caller, “Sen. Josh Hawley compared pro-lifers’ battle against abortion Wednesday to abolitionists fighting the ‘moral evil of slavery.’ The Missouri Republican praised abortion survivor Melissa Ohden’s testimony on Capitol Hill Wednesday during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the Democratic Women’s Health Protection Act, which would ‘create a statutory right for health care providers to provide abortion care.’ ‘You think about the abolitionists who for decades and decades and decades fought against the moral evil of slavery, fought it when it was the majority position of the country, fought it when they were told that they were crazy, fought it because they knew, they knew, there was a moral truth that every person is created equal and has equal rights,’ Hawley said. ‘And they were willing to fight for that in our country.’” [Daily Caller, 6/16/21]
Hawley Claimed Democrats Advocated For Abortions In The Final Weeks Of Pregnancy And Compared America’s Abortion Polices To Iran And China. According to Fox News, “‘Democrat politicians are actually advocating abortion in the final weeks of pregnancy,’ Hawley said. ‘These are policies … that only a few countries in the world -- like Iran, like China -- allow. We’ve got to stop this kind of extremism.’” [Fox News, 5/16/19]
Hawley Claimed That New York And Virginia Passed Laws That Allowed A Baby To Be Born And Then Killed After Birth. According to the Washington Examiner, “Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said that Alabama’s passage of the nation’s strictest anti-abortion bill is a reaction to late-term abortion legislation seen in states like New York, and exaggerated the extent of the proposed measures. ‘It’s a direct response, Steve, to the extremism we’ve seen in places like New York and Virginia where you have Democrat politicians who are ... passing laws that would allow a baby to be born and then killed after birth,’ Hawley said in an interview with Fox News’ Steve Doocy on Thursday. ‘It’s just incredible the extremism that we’re seeing, and I think you’re seeing these states responding.’” [Washington Examiner, 5/16/22]
Hawley Filed An Amicus Brief For June Medical Services V. Gee, Which Called For The Court To Uphold A Fifth Circuit Ruling That Upheld A Louisiana Law Requiring Physicians Who Perform Abortions To Have Admitting Privileges. According to Roll Call, “200 lawmakers, mostly Republicans, filed an amicus brief Thursday urging the Supreme Court to upend the precedents set by two landmark abortion rights cases, elevating abortion as a campaign issue ahead of this fall’s elections. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on March 4 in June Medical Services v. Gee, a case over a 2014 Louisiana law that requires physicians who offer abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital within 30 miles. Abortion rights advocates argue that the restrictions are burdensome and would cause most doctors to stop performing abortions. Lower courts blocked the law, citing a 2016 Supreme Court case known as Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which blocked a similar admitting privileges law in Texas. […] Josh Hawley, of Missouri, submitted his own separate brief. He called for the decision from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to stand, arguing that it would improve safety and credentialing.” [Roll Call, 5/2/20]
The Supreme Court Reversed The Fifth Circuit Judgment Striking Down Louisiana’s Admitting Privileges Law. According to Oyez, “The Fifth Circuit’s judgment, upholding a Louisiana law that requires abortion providers to hold admitting privileges at local hospitals, is reversed. Justice Stephen Breyer authored the plurality opinion on behalf of himself and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. [Oyez, accessed 5/19/22]
Hawley Tweeted That The Ruling Was A “Disaster” And That “It Perpetuates Bad Precedent While Barely Bothering To Explain Why.” According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “Today’s #SCOTUS decision in the June Medical case is a disaster. It perpetuates bad precedent while barely bothering to explain why. It is a big-time wake up call to religious conservatives. We must make our voices heard. And time for hard look at vetting & selection process” [Twitter, @HawleyMO, 6/29/20]
Hawley Co-Sponsored The Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act Of 2019 That Would Ban Dilation And Evacuation Abortions. According to a press release from Sen. James Lankford, “Senators James Lankford (R-OK) and Mike Rounds (R-SD) today introduced the Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act of 2019. This legislation would prohibit physicians from performing dismemberment abortions. It would impose a criminal fine, up to two years in prison, or both for individuals who perform this type of abortion. […] A dismemberment abortion, also called a ‘dilation and evacuation’ abortion, is the most commonly used abortion method in second trimester abortions (week 13 to week 28 of pregnancy). In a dismemberment abortion, an unborn child is dismembered and extracted, one piece at a time. The child can also remain intact until he or she is crushed through the use of clamps, grasping forceps, tongs, scissors or other similar instruments. The Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act of 2019 allows the performance of a dismemberment abortion if necessary to save a mother’s life. It does not limit abortions performed in cases of rape or incest, if performed by a method other than dismemberment abortion. This bill prohibits the prosecution of women upon whom a dismemberment abortion is performed. Additional cosponsors include Senators Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Steve Daines (R-MT), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Josh Hawley (R-MO), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Jim Risch (R-ID), Tim Scott (R-SC), and John Thune (R-SD). Similar legislation, the Saving Children Act, was introduced in the House of Representatives this year by Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ).” [Press Release-Sen. Lankford, 4/4/19]
Hawley Co-Sponsored The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. According to a press release from Sen. Hawley, “Senator Hawley is an original cosponsor of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.” [Press Release-Sen. Hawley, 2/25/19]
Abortion Rights Advocates Stated That The Bill Was “Based On Lies And A Misinformation Campaign, Aimed At Shaming Women And Criminalizing Doctors For A Practice That Doesn't Exist In Medicine Or Reality.” According to CBS News, “Abortion rights advocates rebuked the legislation and the rhetoric surrounding it, saying that the situation described in the bill -- infants surviving abortions -- is an extreme rarity, only occurring in instances of abnormalities so severe that the fetus has been deemed unviable. ‘When you're providing abortion care, this isn't something that happens,’ Elizabeth Nash, a senior state issues manager at the Guttmacher Institute, said in a telephone interview with CBS News Monday. ‘This legislation is based on lies and a misinformation campaign, aimed at shaming women and criminalizing doctors for a practice that doesn't exist in medicine or reality,’ Planned Parenthood Federation of America President, Leana Wen, wrote in an email to CBS News. Sen. Mazie Hirono from Hawaii called the bill ‘a solution in search of a problem.’” [CBS News, 2/27/19]
After Democrats Filibustered The Bill, Hawley Claimed “It’s A Disgrace That Democrats Have Tried To Make The Issue Of Life So Convoluted That They Now Can’t Even Find The Moral Courage To Disavow Infanticide.” According to a press release from Sen. Hawley, “Following Democrats’ successful filibuster of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, Senator Josh Hawley released the following statement: ‘Protecting the most vulnerable members of our society should not be a partisan issue. We’re talking about newborn babies. Every person has equal dignity and worth, and every life is worth fighting for no matter how small. It’s as simple as that,’ said Senator Hawley. ‘It’s a disgrace that Democrats have tried to make the issue of life so convoluted that they now can’t even find the moral courage to disavow infanticide.’” [Press Release-Sen. Hawley, 2/25/19]
Hawley Co-Sponsored The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, Which Would Make It A Crime For Doctors To Knowingly Perform An Abortion On An Out-Of-State Minor “Without Parental Consent, Notification, Or Judicial Authorization.” According to a press release from Sen. Marco Rubio, “Today, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) introduced the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA). If enacted, CIANA would make it a federal crime for physicians to knowingly perform an abortion on an out of state minor without parental consent, notification, or judicial authorization. The bill also sets criminal penalties for those who violate, as well as provides exceptions when the life of a minor is endangered. CIANA would also prohibit an individual who has committed incest from knowingly bringing that minor across states lines for the purpose of an abortion. ‘With the rights of parents and the safety of women at risk,’ Rubio said, ‘Congress must take action to prevent underage abortions by giving states the federal backing necessary to enforce their parental involvement laws. Under current law, minors are subject to the exploitation and safety risks that often come from an overzealous interstate abortion industry.’ Joining Senator Rubio in introducing this legislation are Senators Roy Blunt (R-MO), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Jim Risch (R-ID), Josh Hawley (R-MO), James Inhofe (R-OK), James Lankford (R-OK), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Bill Cassidy (R-LA).” [Press Release- Sen. Marco Rubio, 1/15/19]
Hawley Wrote A Letter To President Biden Urging Him To Reconsider Rescinding The Global Gag Rule (AKA The Mexico City Policy). According to a press release from Sen. Hawley, “Today U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) sent a letter to President Joe Biden urging him to reconsider rescinding the Mexico City Policy, a rule that prevented U.S. aid money from being allocated to foreign nonprofit organizations (NGOs) who perform or actively support abortions. Senator Hawley wrote, ‘For millions of pro-life Missourians, and millions more pro-life and religious conservatives across the country, your administration’s effort to compel American taxpayers to fund foreign organizations working to snuff out the lives of unborn children around the world is an affront to their most deeply-held beliefs. Sadly, it provides further evidence that your appeals to unity were primarily words for a campaign – words that you appear to have little intention of putting into action.’” [Press Release-Sen. Hawley, 2/3/21]
Hawley Introduced The Women’s Public Health And Safety Act Legislation, Which Would Exclude Abortion Providers From Receiving State Medicaid Funds. According to a press release form Ted Cruz, “U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), along with Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), John Barraso (R-Wyo.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), John Thune (R-S.D.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Cynthia Lummis (R- Wyo.), Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Roger Marshall (R- Kan.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), and Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) this week introduced the Women's Public Health and Safety Act, legislation that gives states the authority to exclude abortion providers, like Planned Parenthood, from receiving Medicaid funds.” [Press Release-Ted Cruz, 1/29/21]
Hawley Said “That Wouldn’t Be My Priority Out Of The Gate” When Asked About A Nationwide Abortion Ban. According to CNN, “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell slightly nudged the door open last week when he said ‘it's possible’ the GOP could move to ban abortion nationwide. Republicans on Monday quickly shut it. ‘I don't think it's really an appropriate topic for Congress to be passing a national law on,’ said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, a member of McConnell's leadership team. ‘That wouldn't be my priority out of the gate,’ said Sen. Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri. ‘I think it would be better for states to debate this, allow it to breathe and for Congress to act where there's national consensus." [CNN, 5/9/22]
When Asked About A Nationwide Abortion Ban Hawley Said “I Think It Would Be Better For States To Debate This, Allow It To Breathe And For Congress To Act Where There's National Consensus." According to CNN, “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell slightly nudged the door open last week when he said ‘it's possible’ the GOP could move to ban abortion nationwide. Republicans on Monday quickly shut it. ‘I don't think it's really an appropriate topic for Congress to be passing a national law on,’ said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, a member of McConnell's leadership team. ‘That wouldn't be my priority out of the gate,’ said Sen. Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri. ‘I think it would be better for states to debate this, allow it to breathe and for Congress to act where there's national consensus." [CNN, 5/9/22]
Hawley Said That He Did Not Support A Federal Ban On Abortion. According to KSDK, “Hawley: ‘No, I don't support a federal ban on abortion after Roe vs. Wade, if it's overturned in the first instance. I mean, I think that what needs to happen first is Congress can look for areas where there's national consensus and act on those, and then the people in our states, beginning with the people of Missouri, will finally get an opportunity to weigh in. And I think that's as it should be, and then Congress can act where consensus is. But in the first instance, I would not support a federal ban on all abortions.’” [KSDK, 5/5/22]
Hawley Said Americans Should Decide What The Abortion Laws Are In Their States. According to Fox News, “If the court sides with the state of Mississippi in Dobbs v. Jackson as the leaked draft opinion suggests, Hawley said Americans would be able to decide what abortion laws should be in their states in a ‘small-d’ democratic form of governance. Observers have pointed out that left-leaning state governments in New York and California are likely to thereby legislate far to the pro-choice side of the spectrum, while right-leaning states like Texas and Florida are likely to support the pro-life view through legislation ‘That's what the Constitution gives to the people -- the right to control this issue and to make up their own minds,’ Hawley said.” [Fox News, 5/5/22]
Hawley Said Abortion “Should Be Barred By American Law.” According to Life Site Now, “Hawley says his contribution to the Hobby Lobby case is evidence of how he would prioritize protection of the unborn as attorney general. ‘Abortion is not a right,’ he explained. ‘It is a violent act against the defenseless. It violates every principle of morality and should be barred by American law. Until that day, I fully support bans on partial-birth abortion, third-trimester abortion, and indeed every limit that can receive public support.’” [Life Site Now, 2/11/16]
Hawley Said Abortion Should Be “Barred.” According to Life News, “Hawley’s views on the abortion issue are unequivocal. ‘Abortion is not a right. It is a violent act against the defenseless. It violates every principle of morality and should be barred by American law.’” [Life News, 8/8/17]
Hawley Appealed A District Judge’s Ruling Blocking Missouri Abortion Restrictions, Requiring Health Centers To Be “Outfitted Like Ambulatory Surgical Centers” And That Providers Have Unnecessary Admitting Privileges In Hospitals. According to St. Louis Public Radio, “As expected, Missouri has appealed a federal judge’s ruling blocking two abortion restrictions enacted by the Legislature in 2007. Attorney General Josh Hawley had said he would appeal the preliminary injunction entered by U.S District Judge Howard Sachs last week. The injunction blocks Missouri’s laws requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and abortion clinics to be outfitted like ambulatory surgical centers.” [St. Louis Public Radio, 5/12/17]
Hawley Wanted Planned Parenthood Kicked Out Of Medicaid And Described Funding Planned Parenthood As “The Devil’s Bargain.” According to an interview Hawley did with Life Site News, “‘Taxpayer-funded abortion, especially the devil’s bargain with Planned Parenthood, must cease immediately. To be clear, that means I believe Planned Parenthood should receive no tax monies of any kind. In Missouri, Planned Parenthood should be kicked out of the state’s Medicaid program immediately.’ Hawley had harsh words for top state officials, who, he says, ‘have given Planned Parenthood a sweetheart deal, failing to carry out serious inspections of Planned Parenthood facilities and settling litigation with Planned Parenthood in Kansas City that effectively exempted that facility from Missouri’s surgical center laws.’” [Life Site News, 2/11/16]
In His Campaign For Attorney General Of Missouri, Hawley Vowed To “Activate The State’s Medicaid Fraud Unit Against Planned Parenthood.” According to an interview Hawley did with Life Site News, “‘As attorney general, I would immediately activate the state’s Medicaid fraud unit against Planned Parenthood of Missouri; the Planned Parenthood videos are more than enough to suggest multiple violations of state law. And I would call for Planned Parenthood’s immediate expulsion from the state’s Medicaid program. This move would end all public funding for all Planned Parenthood clinics in the state of Missouri.’” [Life Site News, 2/11/16]
Hawley Tweeted That Missouri Should Follow Texas Lead And Kick Planned Parenthood Out Of Medicaid. According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “Texas kicks Planned Parenthood out of its Medicaid program. Exactly what my PP Response Plan calls for in MO!” [Twitter, @HawleyMO, 10/19/15]
Hawley Tweeted Call To Defund Planned Parenthood. According to Hawley’s personal Twitter, “Time for MO Leg to DO SOMETHING about Planned Parenthood. Defund PP now.” [Twitter, @HawleyMO 1/12/16]
Hawley Criticized Missouri For Not Inspecting Planned Parenthoods More. According to Life News, “During his campaign last year, Hawley criticized state officials for ‘giving Planned Parenthood a sweetheart deal,’ and for ‘failing to carry out serious inspections of Planned Parenthood facilities.’” [Life News, 8/8/17]
Hawley Said He Was “100% Prolife” And He Opposed All Abortions And Embryonic Stem Cell Research. According to Life Site News, “A top GOP candidate for Missouri attorney general says he is the candidate who is ‘100 percent pro-life’ and that his primary opponent is a ‘multiple choice’ opportunist. ‘I am 100 percent pro-life and have been my whole life,’ University of Missouri School of Law professor Josh Hawley told LifeSiteNews. ‘That means I am opposed to abortion at any stage of pregnancy, and I am opposed to embryonic stem-cell research. As for my record, as a constitutional lawyer, I have fought to protect the unborn, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Hobby Lobby case, for instance, was at its core a case about the right to life: in that litigation, we defeated the Obama administration’s abortion drug mandate.’” [Life Site News, 2/11/16]
Hawley Attacked Republican Primary Opponent For Supporting Embryonic Stem Cell Research And Cloning. According to Life Site News, “However, Hawley says Schaefer’s opposition to abortion is simple political opportunism. ‘Senator Schaefer built a career running on a pro-Roe position.’ ‘Besides defending Roe as a decision that settles the abortion issue and voicing support for the ‘status quo on abortion,’ he also supports embryonic stem cell research, including Missouri’s infamous pro-cloning Amendment 2. Indeed, Schaefer has taken tens of thousands of dollars from pro-cloning, pro-stem cell groups, including $20,000 just weeks ago.’” [Life Site News, 2/11/16]
Hobby Lobby Argued The ACA Birth Control Mandate Violated Their Religious Beliefs. According to the Associated Press, “Hobby Lobby is challenging the federal mandate because the CEO says it would violate his religious beliefs to pay for contraception coverage for his employees. Hawley said he does not expect his group to donate campaign funds to individual candidates. Instead, he said the non-profit will host public awareness events and lectures around the state to educate people on constitutional issues.” [Associated Press, 3/20/14]
Hobby Lobby Lawsuit Objected To 4 Of The 20 Forms Of Birth Control. According to Legal Monitor Worldwide, “‘While the Green family has no moral objection to providing 16 out of the 20 FDA-approved drugs and devices that are a part of the federal mandate, providing drugs and devices that have the potential to terminate a life conflicts with their faith,’ according to a statement on Hobby Lobby’s website. Hobby Lobby claims it is a religious employer because its owners ‘wanted to run their company according to their Gospel convictions,’ Hawley said.” [Legal Monitor Worldwide, 5/31/14]
Hawley Said The Case Was Focused On Religious Liberty. According to the Lawton Constitution, “An attorney representing Oklahoma-based arts and crafts chain Hobby Lobby in its challenge of a federal contraception coverage mandate launched a nonprofit group in Missouri on Thursday that will focus on the issues of religious liberty and constitutional rights. University of Missouri law professor Joshua Hawley is part of the legal team representing Hobby Lobby that is scheduled to argue its case before the U.S. Supreme Court next week. The company sued to over-turn a federal mandate that requires most employers to provide health insurance that includes birth control.” [Lawton Constitution, 3/21/14]
Hawley Said Hobby Lobby Was Not Focused On The Broader Employer Mandate. According to the Joplin Globe, “Hawley said the case would not impact the broader employer mandate or other provisions of the law - only the contraceptive mandate in the context of whether a business (often considered a ‘person’ for the purposes of federal law) can object to something on First Amendment religious grounds. Other parts of the First Amendment, like freedom of the press, have been applied before to companies like the New York Times or even the owners of The Joplin Globe, and the freedom of speech has been applied in the Citizens United case allowing corporations to spend money on political campaigns. ‘The issue is whether or not business people can run their business according to their religious convictions,’ he said.” [Joplin Globe, 3/24/14]
Hawley Said The Case Was About If For-Profit Companies Had Religious Rights. According to the Joplin Globe, “Hawley said in precise form, the issue of whether a for-profit corporation has religious liberty rights is an ‘issue of first impression’ for the case, part of which may be why the case is getting so much attention.” [Joplin Globe, 3/24/14]
Hawley Said The Court Needed To Rule For Hobby Lobby Because There Were Already So Many Exceptions. According to the Joplin Globe, “‘Very few laws survive strict scrutiny, and the government cannot in this case,’ Hawley said. The government has exempted scores and scores of businesses from this mandate. Over half of the nation’s work force is exempted for non-religious interests. It’s pretty hard for the government to make a compelling case when they’ve exempted half the work force for doing so.’” [Joplin Globe, 3/24/14]
Hawley Claimed The Government Had Other Ways To Deliver Contraception. According to the Joplin Globe, “Furthermore, Hawley noted, the government has funded other ways to deliver contraception to women. ‘The government has alternative means,’ he said.” [Joplin Globe, 3/24/14]
Hawley Said Hobby Lobby Needed To Prove A Sincere Religious Belief. According to the Examiner, “Let’s consider the arguments before the court and the response of some of the justices. ‘At oral arguments on Tuesday,’ writes the Huffington Post, ‘the women justices were the most aggressive in their questioning of Hobby Lobby’s lawyer, former Solicitor General Paul D. Clement. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan asked whether other companies should be allowed to refuse to cover other procedures, like blood transfusions and vaccines, if employers had a religious objection to such medical treatments.’ I put that question to Professor Joshua D. Hawley of the University of Missouri School of Law. Hawley is also counsel to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. In an email, Hawley wrote: ‘... the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (which states that government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion) does not give religious objectors a blank check. The statute requires objectors to show that they have a sincere religious belief that is substantially burdened. And it permits the government to impose the regulation anyway if the government can show that its interest is truly compelling and that it has no other viable means available for achieving it.’” [Examiner, 3/26/14]
Hawley Worked On Hobby Lobby Case. According to the Associated Press, “Josh Hawley is on a team of about 15 lawyers working on Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Inc., which addresses whether businesses can use religious objections to avoid a requirement to provide insurance coverage for birth control for employees. The Columbia Daily Tribune reports the case goes before the court Tuesday. Hobby Lobby objects to covering certain contraceptives in its health plans required by the federal health law.” [Associated Press, 3/24/14]
Hawley Traveled To Washington DC For Oral Arguments. According to the Joplin Glove, “Hawley was one of more than a dozen lawyers involved in arguing and strategizing Hobby Lobby’s case. He traveled to Washington, D.C., to participate in oral arguments earlier this year.” [Joplin Glove, 6/30/14]
Hawley: This Case Is Not About Contraception But About Religious Freedom. While appearing on Fox News, “KELLY: And, Josh, let me ask you. Because in the case of Hobby Lobby, it’s an evangelical company, they did not want to pay for these particular drugs, they paid for 16 others but did not want to pay for these four. And do what I said in the intro. In response the left has come out, this is an example of the national organi-zation for women, the court has lent its way to the radical right’s war on women, talking about how now they want to take away coverage, birth control coverage from millions of women. JOSH HAWLEY, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING HOBBY LOBBY: Not at all true. I mean, as a matter of fact, Hobby Lobby already provides and pays for -- covers 16 out of the 20 forms of contraception that are legally available in this country, Megyn. And as today’s decision makes clear, the government has ample alternative means to make the four forms of contraception that we’re talking about in this case available to women without cost who want it. So, this case really has nothing to do with access to contraception, this case is about religious liberty.” [Fox News, 6/30/14]
Hawley Said Hobby Lobby Had Accidently Covered Some Of The Birth Control Drugs Before. While appearing on Fox News, “KELLY: Just to make clear, Josh. For the history of Hobby Lobby, have the women ever gotten coverage of those four drugs? HAWLEY: There was a time in the past when the Green family unknowingly covered one or two of those drugs, Megyn, without realizing that they did. In fact, operate as abortion-inducing drugs. But here’s another fact that’s important to know, Hobby Lobby has provided contraceptive coverage for its female employees under their healthcare plans for years. For and years long before the affordable care act.” [Fox News, 6/30/14]
Hawley Said He Was Inspired Watching The Lawyers For The Obama Administration Take On Hobby Lobby. According to Rolla Daily News, “Hawley got the political bug when he worked at the Supreme Court. His epiphany came slowly, but surely. Up close and personal with the Obama administration lawyers that were taking on Hobby Lobby, he says he saw the Obama administration bullies in action. He served as an attorney for the firm that represented Oklahoma City-based Hobby Lobby, in their lawsuit against the Obama administration’s interpretive actions of the Affordable Care Act. ‘I listened to the administration’s lawyer say in court that if you start a business in this country, you give up your first amendment rights to freedom of religion. It’s one or the other, the administration said. You can practice your faith, but you’ve got to do it within the walls of your churches or inside your own home.’” [Rolla Daily News, 5/10/16]
Hawley Ran For Attorney General On His Time Working On The Hobby Lobby Case. According to the Missouri Times, “Josh Hawley, college professor and Republican candidate for attorney general, has been touring the state for well over a year speaking at Republican events and touting his accomplishments arguing last year’s Burwell v. Hobby Lobby ruling, but what he actually did in that case seems to be unclear to many Missourians.” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
Hawley Listed His Occupation As “Hobby Lobby Litigator” On Numerous Events And Websites. According to the Missouri Times, “In February 2014, Hawley was marketed to Newton and Jasper County Republicans as the ‘Hobby Lobby Lawyer’ and made the featured speaker of the Republican dinner. A June 2014 press release from Hawley’s group – the Missouri Liberty Project – called Hawley ‘Hobby Lobby Litigator Josh Hawley.’ The release lead with ‘Missouri Liberty Project founder Josh Hawley, an attorney who helped Hobby Lobby and its owners in their landmark victory for religious liberty at the U.S. Supreme Court…’ Today, his campaign website says, ‘Josh Hawley is a conservative constitutional attorney who has been to the Supreme Court and won.’” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
Hawley Called Hobby Lobby A Great Victory For Liberty. According to the Lebannon Daily Record, “‘It’s a great victory for the conservative movement, it’s a great victory for the Constitution and a great victory for liberty in this country,’ Hawley said. ‘I’m proud to be able to stand in front of you and say, ‘We won.’ I hope this is the beginning of something bigger.’” [Lebannon Daily Record, 7/24/14]
Hawley Said The Case Was Not About Birth Control But Religious Freedom After The Green Family Was Told To Violate Their Beliefs Or Go Out Of Business. According to the Lebannon Daily Record, “Hawley said that while the contraceptives get all of the headlines, the case is actually about religious freedom. The Green family only wanted to operate their business and ‘live out their faith-based convictions,’ which he said ‘landed them in court.’ He claims the Greens were given a choice to either ‘violate their convictions or go out of business.’” [Lebannon Daily Record, 7/24/14]
Hawley Said Hobby Lobby Was About America Not Telling People What To Believe. According to the Lebannon Daily Record, “‘It’s about whether or not we as Americans will be free to practice our beliefs, whatever they may be, or whether government will tell us what we have to believe and how we can believe,’ Hawley said. The attorney asserts that the current administration in the White House has been leading an ‘assault’ on religious liberty.” [Lebannon Daily Record, 7/24/14]
Hawley Said The Hobby Lobby Case Showed How Obama Was The Most Hostile President To Religious Liberty Ever. According to the Lebannon Daily Record, “‘It really has been an assault on our constitutional liberties as a whole, and that’s why the fight for religious liberty is so vital as we fight to defend all of our personal liberties,’ he said. He believes the case also ‘exposes’ that the Obama administration has been ‘more hostile to religious liberty than any administration ... in our history.’ Hawley believes the ruling has opened doors for business people of faith to ‘demand exemption from government regulation’ in certain cases where such regulations would ‘substantially burden’ the person without the government proving a ‘compelling interest’ in doing so.” [Lebannon Daily Record, 7/24/14]
Hawley Called Working For The Green Family A Privilege. According to Nesho Daily News, “‘It was a great privilege to be a part of the team that stood with David and Barbara Green of Hobby Lobby and represented them in this important case; which really is I’m glad to say a landmark case for religious liberty and a landmark win in defense of our Constitution and our Constitutional freedoms;’ said attorney Josh Hawley, the featured speaker at the annual Free Watermelon Feed in Neosho’s Big Spring Park, hosted prior to the August primary elections each year by the county Republican Party.” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Called Religious Freedom What Was Stopping European Style Social Welfare. According to Nesho Daily News, “‘That’s the path not of the Constitution, but the path of bigger government, the path of European-style social welfare government, the path of secularism.’ Hawley continued, ‘For the Obama Administration and now many of our friends on the left, religious liberty is not something to be embraced and defended, but it is now the enemy, it is something to be fought against and to be removed from public.’” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Said The Hobby Lobby Fight Was About Religious Liberties And The Constitution. According to Nesho Daily News, “He equated the fight for religious liberty to the fight to defend our Constitution and all of our other liberties Hawley said the Hobby Lobby case actually began in 1970 when the Greens began as a mom-and-pop operation from their home that has blossomed into a company with over 600 stores in 47 states, writing a statement of faith into their original company charter that obligated them to treat their employees in a certain way and to interact in their community in a certain way.” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Said The Green Family Religion Is What Landed Them In Court But Also What Makes Them By Their Employees Double The Minimum Wage. According to Nesho Daily News, “‘Because of that,’ he said, ‘they pay their employees double the minimum wage, they close on Sundays as you might know, they give significant portions of their company profits every year to charities, that’s just who they are, that’s the Greens, that’s their business, that’s their dream.’ Hawley said it was their faith convictions that landed them in court with this administration, which showcases the left’s view of what they think of our country and where they want to take it.” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Claimed That The Green Family Was Told To Offer The Birth Control Or Pay A Fine Of $1.3 Million A Day. According to Nesho Daily News, “‘Because what the Obama Administration said to the Greens was, ‘In order to do business in America, you have to give up your faith convictions.’ They said to David and Barbara Green, ‘You have to provide or pay for four abortion-inducing drugs and devices, and if you don’t, then we’re going to fine you $1.3 million every day.’’ He said the argument to the Greens was, ‘Give up your faith or go out of business.’ Hawley noted that was basically the argument of government attorneys as the case made its way through the system all the way to the Supreme Court.” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Said The Governments Position On Hobby Lobby Was If You Have A For Profit Company You Give Up Your Religious Liberty Rights. According to Nesho Daily News, “‘Quite simply, the government said, ‘If you start a for-profit business in the United States, you give up your religious liberty rights. You cannot make a First Amendment claim for religious liberty as a business person in the United States.’’ Hawley said the argument is that your religious faith should be locked away, and it says that to do business in America, you need to agree with the government’s moral convictions.” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Called Religious Freedom The Basis Of All Other Constitutional Freedoms. According to Nesho Daily News, “‘It tells us that they think religion is a problem, that religion is a barrier to progress, that religion needs to be kept out of the public sphere, and certainly kept out of the workplace, and most importantly religion is a barrier to bigger government, which is what much of this case was from the very beginning,’ he said. Hawley proclaimed that religious liberty is really the foundation for all of our other Constitutional freedoms.” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Said While They Won Hobby Lobby The Fight Was Far From Over. According to the Lebannon Daily Record, “‘Hobby Lobby was a great victory, but the flght is far from over,’ said attorney Joshua Hawley amidst a scattering of ‘amens’ from the group of about 15 people who attended a speaking engagement at Dowd’s in Lebanon. Hawley, who as a member of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty was part of the team representing Hobby Lobby’s owners in a lawsuit against the federal government, spoke about the importance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling.” [Lebannon Daily Record, 7/24/14]
Hawley Called The Hobby Lobby Case The Opening Battle On Religious Freedom. According to Nesho Daily News, “Hawley believes the Hobby Lobby case is just the opening battle in what will be a multi-year struggle to de-fend religious liberty and our Constitution against attack. He explained that in the days following the court decision, Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid introduced a bill to roll back the Hobby Lobby decision while also stripping out a decades-old law with bi-partisan support for religious conscience across the board.” [Nesho Daily News, 7/25/14]
Hawley Wrote That The Government Was Tring To Punish Hobby Lobby For Being Socially Conscious. In a Kansas City Star op-ed Hawley wrote, “Not surprisingly, I find the Greens’ case compelling. But setting aside the technical legal arguments, there is a strange quality to the federal government’s claims. In effect, the government is arguing that Hobby Lobby should be punished for being a socially conscious corporation.” [Kansas City Star, 1/12/14]
Hawley Wrote That The Argument That A For Profit Company Had Nothing To Do With Moral Convictions Troubling. In a Kansas City Star op-ed,Hawley wrote, “The government claims that people who run for-profit corporations do not have religious liberty rights when it comes to managing their businesses because for-profit corporations have nothing to do with moral convictions. They’re about profits. That’s a profoundly troubling argument.” [Kansas City Star Op-ed, 1/12/14]
Hawley Said For Profit Companies Who Help Like Tom Shoes And Warby Parker The New Corporations With Conscience. In a Kansas City Star op-ed Hawley wrote, “One of the most heartening developments of the last decade has been the flourishing of for-profit entrepreneurs who want their business to be about more than profits alone. Companies like Toms Shoes, Warby Parker, and Tegu Toys -- all corporations, by the way -- operate to make a profit but devote a portion of their earnings to helping those in need. These companies have what’s sometimes called a double bottom line. They are corporations with a conscience.” [Kansas City Star Op-ed, 1/12/14]
Hawley Wrote That Not Everyone Would Agree With Hobby Lobby Just Like Not Everyone Agreed With Starbucks On Gay Marriage But They Should Be Celebrated For Having A Social Conscience. In a Kansas City Star op-ed Hawley wrote, “Not every person will agree with the Greens’ social conscience of course, just as not everyone agrees with Starbucks’ recent public statements in support of gay marriage. The point is, companies should be encouraged, not penalized, for having a conscience in the first place.” [Kansas City Star Op-ed, 1/12/14]
Hawley Wrote That Hobby Lobby Was Not Tring To Impose Their Views On Employees. In a Kansas City Star op-ed Hawley wrote, “Some might say that corporate conscience is all well and good, but Hobby Lobby is attempting to impose its convictions on its employees. But this is quite wrong. Hobby Lobby has no objection to its employees using whatever forms of contraception they may choose.” [Kansas City Star Op-ed, 1/12/14]
Hawley Said Hobby Lobby Did Not Want To Ban The Contraceptives; They Just Opposed Paying For Them. In a Kansas City Star op-ed Hawley wrote, “Hobby Lobby is not asking that any contraceptive drugs be made unavailable. It is simply asking not to be forced to pay for a handful of contraceptives that can cause abortions.” [Kansas City Star, 1/12/14]
Hawley: Hobby Lobby Case Determined If Conscience Was Protected In Business. In a USA Today op-ed Hawley wrote, “Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby, the case brought by the Green family, who owns the company, challenging the Obama administration’s mandate that health insurance cover contraceptives. The case will help determine whether conscience has a protected place in business.” [USA Today Op-ed, 3/19/14]
Hawley Described Hobby Lobby Case As “Defending The Right Of Normal, Everyday Americans.” According to the St. Louis Review, “Hawley described Hobby Lobby’s case against the government as important, because it was representative of defending the right of normal, everyday Americans to live our their faith convictions in the workplace. ‘You don’t give up your rights to religious freedom and religious expression when you start a business or when you go into the workplace,’ he said. The Constitution is written to protect religious expression, so long as those expressions are peaceful and don’t harm others.” [St. Louis Review, 3/16/17]
Hawley Said Hobby Lobby Was About The Fact That Religious Expression Doesn’t End Because You Own A Business. According to St. Louis Review, “Hawley described Hobby Lobby’s case against the government as important, because it was representative of defending the right of normal, everyday Americans to live our their faith convictions in the workplace. ‘You don’t give up your rights to religious freedom and religious expression when you start a business or when you go into the workplace,’ he said. The Constitution is written to protect religious expression, so long as those expressions are peaceful and don’t harm others.” [St. Louis Review, 3/16/17]
Hawley Described Himself As “Someone Who Has The Expertise To Stand Up In The Supreme Court.” According to the Missouri Times, “In an interview with the Associated Press, Hawley painted himself as someone who had expertise practicing before the Supreme Court. ‘If you want someone who has the expertise to stand up in the Supreme Court of the United States and defend our liberties and defend our values, then elect a constitutional lawyer.’” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
Hawley Described The Hobby Lobby Case As Being About One Families Religious Liberty And The Fight For Them Not To Have To Provide What They Considered To Be Abortions. According to Missourinet, “The chief counsel representing the family that owns the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores is an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Missouri, Josh Hawley. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of that family, the David Green Family of Oklahoma City, who argued that Hobby Lobby should not have to provide insurance coverage for four types of birth control to its employees. The family says having to provide coverage for those four types of contraceptives would violate their religious objection to abortion. ‘I would say that this is a decision about religious liberty and personal freedom,’ says Hale, ‘and it comes down to, ‘Can Americans form their own their own religious and moral convictions without the government interfering, and can Americans practice those convictions in the workplace and everywhere?’ and the answer to that question is yes they can.’” [Missourinet, 6/30/14]
Hawley Predicted That No Large Corporations Would Seek A Hobby Lobby Style Case. According to Missourinet, “Hawley says the ruling makes clear that the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to the owners of family owned corporations. He thinks it’s not likely that other types of corporations would seek such a ruling. ‘The majority (of the Court) said, and I think they’re right, that it’s implausible that a large, publicly traded corporation would bring one of these suits just because you’d have to get buy-in from lots and lots of shareholders and conglomerates who hold shares.’ Critics argue that the ruling allows the owners of such a corporation to interfere in the personal health decisions of its female employees. Hawley says the case was never about access to contraception.” [Missourinet, 6/30/14]
Hawley Said There Was Just No Burden On The Female Employees Before The Hobby Lobby Case. According to Missourinet, “‘Access to all forms of contraception remains one hundred percent legal, one hundred percent available,’ says Hawley. ‘What the Court emphasized over and over again in its opinion today is that there are other means, the government has other means to deliver or make available these four disputed forms of contraception to the female employees who want it at no cost to the female employees … there just isn’t any burden here on female employees.’” [Missourinet, 6/30/14]
Hawley Said The Burdens The Government Placed On Hobby Lobby Before The Case Were Too Large. According to Missourinet, “‘The Greens were facing $475-million in fines every year if they failed to comply with this contraceptive mandate, so that was a very substantial burden, indeed,’ Hawley says. ‘That is one of the reasons, again, that the Court said you just cannot impose those kinds of burdens on people of faith unless you can show, ‘you’ being the government, that you have a very compelling interest, and the government couldn’t show that.’” [Missourinet, 6/30/14]
Hawley Described The Obama Administration As Trying “At Its Core, A Radical Attempt To Impose The Administration’s Pro-Abortion Agenda On Every Business Person In America.” In a Missouri Right to Life blog, Josh Hawley wrote, “I am one of the attorneys who represented Hobby Lobby at the Supreme Court, and this spring we asked the justices to put a stop to this radical assault on religious freedom which is, at its core, a radical attempt to impose the Administration’s pro-abortion agenda on every business person in America. On June 30, the Court did. The Court’s ruling means that Americans of every religious background are free to take their faith with them into the workplace, and free to make their religious beliefs a part of how they run their business. Contrary to the Obama Administration, you don’t have to agree with the government’s moral priorities in order to do business in America. Our Constitution has long protected our right to live out our religious convictions peaceably—at church, at home, in the workplace, and everywhere. Indeed, that freedom is essential to what makes us Americans. That right won a great victory on June 30.” [Missouri Right to Life, 7/14]
Hawley: Hobby Lobby Win Is “Vindication Of One Of Our Constitution’s Most Remarkable Achievements: Its Ability To Make Religious Difference A Source Of National Unity.” In a Weekly Standard op-ed Hawley wrote, “On June 30, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government cannot force Americans to abandon their most deeply held convictions as the price of doing business in the United States. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby counts as a landmark win for religious liberty. But it is also an important vindication of one of our Constitution’s most remarkable achievements: its ability to make religious difference a source of national unity.” [Weekly Standard, 7/14/14]
Hawley: Hobby Lobby Decision Reaffirmed Personal Freedom. In a Weekly Standard op-ed Hawley wrote, “The Court’s ruling reaffirms one of the most vital personal freedoms we hold as Americans: the freedom to follow our consciences, to form our own religious and moral convictions, and to live peaceably by the convictions we hold. That is cause enough for celebration.” [Weekly Standard, 7/14/14]
Hawley Worked On Briefs And Oral Arguments, But Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement Argued The Case. According to Associated Press, “Paul Clement, former U.S. solicitor general, will argue the case for Oklahoma City-based Hobby Lobby. Hawley has worked on briefs and oral arguments in the case for the Hobby Lobby legal team.” [Associated Press, 3/24/14]
Hawley Did Not Publicly Argue At Anytime During The Hobby Lobby Case. According to the Missouri Times, “Due in part to Hawley’s liberal description of his efforts, some Missouri Republicans are surprised that when they hear Hawley say that he argued the case, as he didn’t actually do any speaking in the case at all. In fact, he wasn’t admitted to the bar to argue at all before the Supreme Court in March 2014.” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
Hawley Was Not Admitted To The Supreme Court Bar Until 2015. According to the Missouri Times, “Again, some would argue that these statements may have overstated his experience. The respondent briefs he participated in writing appears to be the extent of his on-the-record involvement in the Hobby Lobby case. The Missouri Times reached out to the Supreme Court, who said Hawley was admitted to the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States on May 26, 2015, just weeks before Hawley’s attorney general campaign was launched.” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
Republican Representative Expressed Shock On Learning Hawley Did Not Argue In Front Of The Supreme Court. According to the Missouri Times, “‘My wife and I have heard Josh Hawley speak multiple times and is my recollection and hers that he argued the Hobby Lobby case before the U.S. Supreme Court,’ Rep. Rocky Miller, R-Miller County, said. ‘When we both found out he was not admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court bar until after the case and, therefore could not argue before them, we were shocked.’” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
One Republican Activist Said Hawley Said He Looked Across The Way At Opposing Counsel During Hobby Lobby Case. According to the Missouri Times, “The fact that he observed the proceedings from the gallery and not as an arguing counsel came as a surprise to one Republican activist who heard Hawley speak last Monday night in Camden County, where she remembered Hawley say he ‘looked across at the opposing counsel table where the Solicitor General was making arguments he could not believe.’” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
Hawley Was Listed On A Brief For Hobby Lobby That Was Submitted By The Becket Fund. According to the Missouri Times, “In one of the biggest rulings of 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that closely held corporations could be exempt from laws to which owners ‘religiously object.’ Hawley is listed as one of the lawyers on a brief in the case. The brief was prepared for and submitted in conjunction with the Becket Fund in support of Hobby Lobby. Court records show that the only litigator who did any actual arguing before the court was Paul D. Clement, who is a partner at Bancroft PLLC and formerly served as the 43rd Solicitor General of the United States from June 2005 until June 2008.” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
Hawley Is Listed In Hobby Lobby Documents As Being With The University Of Missouri Law School. According to the Missouri Times, “Clement is listed alongside Michael McGinley as attorneys with Bancroft PLLC in Washington, D.C. Peter Dobelbower and John Graham are listed General Counsel and Assistant Counsel for Hobby Lobby. Kyle Duncan, a former Louisiana Solicitor General, is listed as the counsel of record and Eric Rassbach, Luke Goodrich, Mark Rienzi, Lori Windham, and Adele Keim are listed with The Becket Fund in Washington D.C. Joshua Hawley is listed last with the University of Missouri School of Law with his taxpayer-funded office address and phone line listed as his contact information.” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
PolitiFact Found That Hawley’s Name Was Listed On Documents For The Hobby Lobby Case. According to PolitiFact, “Throughout the primary and general election campaign, Republican Attorney General candidate Josh Hawley has made the claim that he’s beaten the Obama administration at the Supreme Court twice, most notably in the Hobby Lobby case that allowed certain private companies to claim a religious exemption from the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive requirement. ‘He fought Obama at the Supreme Court — and won,’ Hawley’s campaign said in an ad. That’s a pretty impressive claim, and something that has been questioned by others. So we wondered: What exactly was Hawley’s involvement in these cases, and did he really take on President Barack Obama’s administration? The briefs in each case tell us that yes, Hawley was involved in both the Hobby Lobby case as well as a case regarding an Evangelical Lutheran church and school. His name appears in both of these court documents, with his MU Law School office address listed.” [PolitiFact, 10/7/16]
PolitiFact Found His Claim To Have Fought And Won The Hobby Lobby Case To Be Mostly True. According to PolitiFact, “Hawley’s campaign ads claim he ‘fought Obama at the Supreme Court — and won.’ Even though he did not make oral arguments or even appear before the justices, all the key players involved in the Hobby Lobby and Hosanna-Tabor cases say he played important, even instrumental, roles in shaping legal arguments and strategy. One case was a key ruling that limited the Affordable Care Act, the signature legislation of the Obama administration. The other ruling limited the the reach of the Americans with Disabilities Act, a federal law administered by the executive branch, headed by President Barack Obama. We find this claim to be Mostly True.” [PolitiFact, 10/7/16]
Hawley Described His Work On The Legal Team That Defended Hobby Lobby In A Case: “I Have Litigated In All The Courts.” According to the Joplin Globe, “Hawley described his work on the legal team that defended Hobby Lobby in a case challenging the Affordable Care Act. He said he also had defended church schools and other groups in religious liberty cases. ‘I have litigated in all the courts,’ he said.” [Joplin Globe, 7/8/16]
Hawley’s Campaign Said He Was Proud Of His Work On The Hobby Lobby Case. According to the Missouri Times, “A gentleman named Brad Todd from OnMessage, Inc. emailed a statement on behalf of the Hawley campaign explaining how Hawley was involved in the Supreme Court cases and providing a statement from Duncan PLLC. Todd was quick to call out primary opponent Sen. Kurt Schaefer. ‘Josh Hawley was proud to serve as co-counsel at the Supreme Court for both the Hobby Lobby case and the Hosanna-Tabor case,’ emailed Todd. ‘Both were landmark victories. Winning victories at the Supreme Court is something that happens over months and sometimes years of litigation. Josh was proud to be an integral part of that litigation in both cases. Josh is one of the nation’s leading experts in defending religious liberty — and that is a key point of differentiation in this race for Attorney General against Senator Schaefer, who has been an opponent of religious liberty as a state politician.’ Todd calls himself a consultant with Josh Hawley’s campaign and is a founder of OnMessage Inc., a consulting firm out of Alexandria, Va.” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]
The Becket Fund Called Hawley An Important Part Of The Hobby Lobby Case. According to the Missouri Times, “The Becket Fund, which led the charge in the Hobby Lobby case, sent this statement after this article was posted. ‘The Becket Fund has had incredible success at the Supreme Court, and Josh Hawley has been an integral part of it,’ it reads. ‘Josh served as co-counsel both in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC (2012) and Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014). In both cases, his work and Supreme Court expertise were critical to our success at every stage of the litigation.’” [Missouri Times, 9/30/15]