If David Daleiden had conducted his undercover investigatory journalism on behalf of a progressive cause, he would be a national hero. Because he instead exposed suspected criminal activity by some of the country’s largest abortion providers, he has been harassed for years by criminal felony charges as well as by civil lawsuits seeking millions of dollars in damages. (See Alexandra DeSanctis’s “Big Abortion v. David Daleiden.”)
In two pending certiorari petitions (here and here), Daleiden seeks the Supreme Court’s review of two Ninth Circuit rulings: one that prevents him from publishing his video recordings, and one that prevents him from invoking the First Amendment as a defense against tort claims. I’m pleased to see that Daleiden has an outstanding team of lawyers, led by Consovoy McCarthy.
I’m also pleased to pass along that the Ethics and Public Policy Center, the think tank where I work, has filed an amicus brief in support of each petition. EPPC argues in its amicus briefs (here and here) that the Ninth Circuit rulings embody the “abortion distortion” that has long plagued cases involving abortion and that these cases provide an excellent opportunity for the Court to make clear that abortion-rights litigants should not receive favored treatment.
Special thanks to Daniel N. Nightingale of the law firm of Wheeler Trigg O’Donnell LLP for his excellent and generous work on these amicus briefs.