Woman Says ACLU Attorney Pushed Her To Have Abortion
Posted on September 27, 2006
Hat tip: Reveal The ACLU:
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case to reverse one of the landmark cases for the legalization of abortion: Doe vs. Bolton. This, along with Roe Vs. Wade were the main cases that legalized abortion and took it away from being a States issue. Sandra Cano, the anonymous Doe is claiming that she never wanted an abortion and that a self-serving ACLU attorney pressured and manipulated her for the purpose of pushing for her own agenda. If you want to see just how far the ACLU will go to forward their agenda, this is a prime example.
In her affidavit to the U.S. District Court in New Jersey, Ms. Cano said she approached a legal aid office in Atlanta for help in regaining custody of her children and a divorce from her husband. She said she was taken advantage of by an “aggressive self-serving attorney, Margie Pitts Hames, the legal-aid attorney.”
Ms. Cano said she never signed an affidavit that said she did not want or could not care for another baby. The affidavit also raised the possibility that she might commit suicide.
“I am 99 percent certain that I did not sign this affidavit,”
Ms. Cano said. “I do not believe it is my signature on the affidavit, and Margie either forged my signature or slipped this document in with other papers while I was signing divorce papers. I never told Margie that I wanted an abortion. The facts stated in the affidavit in Doe v. Bolton are not true.”
Ms. Cano said her mother and the legal aid attorney tried to force her to have an abortion. She said she fled to Oklahoma and returned when she was assured that she would not have to undergo an abortion. Ms. Cano said she went to court where she was told by her attorney not to speak.
Years after the Supreme Court decision, Ms. Cano sued to open up her records, a move opposed by Ms. Pitts Hames. The records showed that Ms. Cano had applied for abortion, was rejected and then sued the state of Georgia, all of which she said was a lie.
“The basic thing is that Doe v. Bolton was fraud,” Ms. Cano said. “None of this was my decision. None of this was me. I don’t understand why no one took it upon themselves in such an important case, a case that allowed a law to be passed to take innocent human lives, to speak to the plaintiff in the case. Why they didn’t speak to me?”
It isn’t surprising that the ACLU would manipulate and pressure a young and vulnerable pregnant girl into having an abortion to further their own agenda. After all, it is a lucrative business. One that the ACLU has made into its top priority; the defense of the First Amendment, the alleged heart and soul of the ACLU’s mission, was listed third, after civil rights. This is a prime example of how the ACLU will use its plaintiffs as mere pawns to further its own agenda, an agenda that many in the ACLU are waking up to discover is more about fundraising and money than civil liberties. Defending abortion “rights” is much a more lucractive venture than defending the speech rights of Nazis, or say… of anti-abortion protesters. Nothing works to raise more money than, “EMERGENCY MEMO” citing some alleged restriction on abortion rights. Quite revealing, yet not surprising, to see just how far into deception and manipulation the ACLU will go for greed and futhering its own agenda.
» Filed Under ACLU, Abortion, Illegal Activities, News
Trackback URL
Comments
6 Responses to “Woman Says ACLU Attorney Pushed Her To Have Abortion”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
Stop the ACLU blogburst
-
More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
This story doesn’t surprise me. The ACLU and Planned Parenthood have been in league with each other since the beginning. While they pretend to fight for the rights of the poor and minorities, their real goal is to kill as many children as possible of those whom they view as inferior to their own “superior” pseudo-intellectual, godless selves.
I’m not familiar with this case, but it seems a little sketchy to me. I don’t deny the possibility that a self-serving lawyer might try to push her own agenda, but the plaintiff bears some responsibility too.
That’s just plain silly. They did ask her, but she had legal representation, so everything is handled through that representation. Even if the allegations are true, the legal aid could only have pulled this off if she was negligent in her duty to oversee the actions that were happening on her behalf.
I read everything I sign. It baffles me that so few people do.
Just keep in mind this was a young woman in the 70’s in a difficult situation. Many young people get taken advantage of and learn the hard way.
I can believe it. Although I grieve for the woman however, Jay, I gotta say I agree with Jeff that the whole “this wasn’t my decision” attitude she is portraying is rather ridiculous. But you are right that a young woman in a situation like that could easily be taken advantage of.
I do find this surprising and odd. Why would the ACLU minimize the potential for more kiddie porn stars? The ACLU is the single biggest supporter and champion of NAMBLA; therefore one must assume the majority of ACLU members are child molesters as well, the rest just view kiddie porn on the net.
A lot of people find legal documents confusing and hire lawyers to translate them. If the lawyer is corrupt then these people will end up signing just about anything. I am not sure if I can blame her. She may well have been a individual who did not have the skills to exert who own opinions. It is a trait that allows people to be sold things they don’t need and don’t want by aggressive salespeople.
Both her parents and the ACLU were pushing for the abortion which is probably comparative to an aggressive salesperson. The question is could her lawyer have reasonably know that she did not support the case. Another question is how many woman are coerced into getting an abortion because they do not have the gumption to stand up for their right to preserve the life of their child. I bet you teens are even more prone to give into pressure from an adult they trust such as their boyfriend or their boyfriend’s mother.