Match Exact Phrase    

Whatfinger: Frontpage For Conservative News Founded By Veterans

"The Best Mix Of Hard-Hitting REAL News & Cutting-Edge Alternative News On The Web"

Share This


June 21, 2019

Pro-Life Court Win We Never Would Have Seen Under A 'President Hillary Clinton' - Imagine How Different Things Would Be Had Trump Not Won In 2016


By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine

Observing Trump supporters, Trump haters and Republicans collectively online we note a number of different types. Those that would celebrate if President Trump took a dump, those that recognize the good and the bad about this administration and balance the two out to determine their support, and those that are always so concerned about what "hasn't" been done they totally ignore everything the President Trump has done.

I have often said, and I will repeat it for those newer to ANP: "Those that only looks for the negative, never 'see' the positive."

There was a comment left on ANP during a discussion about President Trump, made by user mail33006, which stated "He kept Hillary out of the White House. Everything else is gravy."

So, let us delve into the things we have seen that we would never have seen had President Trump not kept Hillary out of the White House.

(If you appreciate stories like this, please consider donating to ANP to help keep us in this battle for the future of America.)



While I have seen Trump supporters hail a number of his achievements, net neutrality repeal, renegotiating NAFTA, pulling out of the Paris Accord, withdrawing from TPP, and many other things, the one generational, lasting change President Trump has given America is constitutional judges.

To date the U.S. Senate has confirmed 123 Article III judges. That includes two to the Supreme Court, 41 to U.S. Appeals courts, and 80 to the United States District Courts. There are also 54 nominations to Article III courts awaiting Senate action, including 2 for the Courts of Appeals, 50 for the District Courts, and 2 for the Court of International Trade. There are 5 vacancies on the U.S. Courts of Appeals, 109 vacancies on the U.S. District Courts, 4 vacancies on the U.S. Court of International Trade. (Source)

Given the countless activist rulings that has interfered with many of President Trump's changes, from immigration to federal funds going to places that provide abortions, the courts have attempted to hinder the agenda, and many of those cases are still going through the appeals process, before they can even petition the Supreme Court.

Now imagine if all those Trump nominees that have been confirmed, were Hillary Clinton nominees, liberal activist judges with lifetime appointments.

Had we now been living under a "President Hillary Clinton," a pro-life ruling issued on Thursday, June 20, 2019, would never have happened.

This morning, a federal court temporarily upheld the Trump administration’s move to disallow abortion facilities from receiving funds from the Title X National Family Planning Program. This will strip Planned Parenthood of up to $60 million in federal funding per year as other lawsuits challenging the policy continue to make their way through the courts.

In a 3-0 decision, the 9th Circuit Court overturned a lower court decision and granted a motion for a stay, allowing the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to allocate Title X funds according to Trump’s agenda.

“Absent a stay, HHS will be forced to allow taxpayer dollars to be spent in a manner that it has concluded violates the law, as well as the Government’s important policy interest (recognized by Congress in § 1008) in ensuring that taxpayer dollars do not go to fund or subsidize abortions,” the court stated. “Because HHS and the public interest would be irreparably harmed absent a stay ... we conclude that a stay of the district court's preliminary injunction orders pending appeal is proper.”

This is noteworthy in a couple of ways.

1) The lower court attempted to force the Trump administration to give tens of millions to Planned Parenthood, funds the Trump administration was determined to go to other healthcare entities, mainly faith-based clinics that offer prenatal care, and information on adoptions, along with health-related services, rather than abortion.

2) This stay was given by the 9th Circuit, which in the first two years of the Trump Presidency, was used to prevent him from keeping promises and implementing his agenda.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is authorized 29 judgeships. According to reports, under the Obama administration there were 19 Democrat-appointed judges out of the 29 authorized, one of the reasons it was always known as one of the most liberal courts in the nation. The U.S. Senate has already confirmed six of Trump's nominations to the 9th circuit, bringing the total number of Republican-appointed judges to 11, with another in the pipeline, which will leave 16 Democrat appointed judges on the 9th, to 12 Republican appointed judges. That will leave two more vacancies to be filled on the 9th circuit.

Assuming Senate Leader Mitch McConnell continues his face-paced confirmation of Trump nominees, the final total until more positions open up, will end up 14 to 16, which will be the most balanced the 9th circuit has been in decades.

The sprawling Ninth Circuit -- which includes California, Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands -- has long been a focus of Trump's. The president has railed against the court in the past for ruling against him in key cases. The court put Trump's travel ban on hold in a ruling that was then overturned by the Supreme Court, and also ruled against the administration's efforts to block California sanctuary laws.

Not only would we not have seen this type of pro-life ruling during a Hillary Clinton presidency because she would have nominated liberal judges, but a Clinton administration would never have attempted to prevent federal funding from the Title X National Family Planning program from going to entities like Planned Parenthood which provide abortion services.

Another recent ruling by the United States Supreme Court would have had a different outcome had we been living under a Hillary Clinton presidency, because the two constitutional SC judges nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, would have been Hillary Clinton nominees, is the long-fought case over the "Peace Cross" in Maryland.

The "Peace Cross"  AKA the Bladensburg Cross, is a 40 foot memorial, built in 1925 to commemorate 49 Prince George’s County, Maryland natives who died in World War I. It was initially built on private land, but the state took over the property in 1961. 

The American Humanist Association, which describes itself as advocates of progressive values and equality for humanists, atheists, freethinkers, and the non-religious across the country, sued the state in 2014 to have the memorial taken down.

The Supreme Court ruled, 7-2, that Bladensburg Cross did not violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, and could remain standing and maintained by Maryland State.

"They said that everything's changing, that this Lemon case where separation of church and state and all these concepts that are not in the words of the Constitution were brought up that have led to a hostility by the government to religion they said, look, in these cases, Lemon is not going to be applied anymore."

Shackelford says the Lemon vs. Kurtzman case of 1971 has been used to attack nativity scenes, veterans memorials, menorahs, and Ten Commandments monuments. "What's happening now is we're going back to the Constitution which is favorable to religious freedom," he said.

At stake in the Peace cross ruling was a dire scenario. "If this memorial is able to be destroyed, that means that bulldozer's gonna turn from Bladensburg and roll across the river over to Arlington National Cemetery where we'll start knocking down the Argonne Cross, the Canadian Cross of Sacrifice and may even makes it way down to Teddy and Bobby Kennedy's graves which themselves have grave markers in the shape of a cross," said Jeremy Dys of First Liberty Institute.

Two of the court's liberal justices, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, both of whom are Jewish, joined their conservative colleagues and ruled in favor of the cross.


Another debate I have seen across the internet come from those that are justifiably frustrated at the slow pace of progress toward implementing a conservative agenda, whether it is from RINO Republicans joining with Democrats or liberal activist judges throwing wrenches into the works, is the argument that Democrats and Republicans are just "two sides of the same coin," and I would highlight the very real differences.

It is not conservative Republicans pushing for abortion with no restrictions, even up to the point of birth, it is liberal Democrats. It is Democrats moving so far to the left that they are actively promoting socialism.... not conservative Republicans. It is liberals that want to continually raise taxes to provide others with "free stuff," not conservatives. It is not conservatives pushing for Medicare for All, free college, open borders, and unlimited illegal immigration, that is liberal politicians....specifically those running to become president in 2020.

To claim there is no differences between the two political parties, ignores the very real differences and goes back the statement at the beginning of this article: "Those that only looks for the negative, never 'see' the positive."



In a world where people seem to want instant gratification, watching the slow moving process of confirming judges, so that now, more than two years into the Trump presidency we have more balance on the courts, so we are seeing certain rulings that reflect that, while still not being thrilled with other rulings, is frustrating, but those changes are finally starting to be seen and felt.

To see the border crisis getting worse by day, while activist judges have the administration jumping through court and after court battling to implement the changes President Trump is trying to accomplish, is infuriating, yet the battles are continuing and with more balanced courts, especially the 9th circuit, things are slowly balancing out.

If one is unable to appreciate the changes that are being seen because all they can do is moan about what isn't yet done, perhaps they are part of the problem, not the solution.

Just remember,  if one of the socialist-communist, liberal Democrat candidates win in 2020........ it will be worse than if we had a "President Hillary Clinton" right now.

Final Note: Should President Trump win the 2020 election, given the fact that he has already provided the nation two constitutional Supreme Court Justices, and given the possibility that by 2024 another two SC seats may become vacant, who would you, the reader, want replacing them? President Trump or one of the Democrat candidates?

EMERGENCY FUNDRAISER: Despite generous donations, the still dwindling advertising revenue over the course of the last two years has forced us to completely deplete all our savings just to survive and continue to keep All News PipeLine online.

So ANP is accepting emergency donations throughout the months of June and July. 


One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card:



Donate monthly from $1 up by becoming an ANP Patron.


Donate Via Snail Mail

Checks or money orders made payable to Stefan Stanford or Susan Duclos can be sent to:

P.O. Box 575
McHenry, MD. 21541


WordPress Website design by Innovative Solutions Group - Helena, MT
comments powered by Disqus

Web Design by Innovative Solutions Group