We’ve all had some time to digest the Dobbs Opinion that overruled Roe v Wade, and it’s time I start sharing some of the key components of the opinion as we lean into election season and a new push to ban abortion in Alaska. 

In this email series – every week on Wednesdays – I’m going to introduce a new component from the Dobbs opinion with some light commentary and perhaps application to our challenges here in Alaska. 

You’ll see below there are also a few news updates from around Alaska and the Lower 48 to give you a sense of how things are going nationally.

Let me know what you think – you can drop your comments in the email links below.



Justice Alito wrote the Controlling Majority Opinion and comes right to the point:

“The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”

While there is great hope here – and what we’ll see in the coming weeks, there is a lot of work to be done, and I think you’ll find that even this huge move in the right direction is incomplete.

Justice Alito was joined in the opinion by Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.

Chief Just Roberts concurred in judgment (more on that to follow). 

Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan dissented.




One question we must ask early and often is since there is no right to abortion in the US Constitution, then why are we acting like there is a right to abortion in the Alaska Constitution?

Let’s chew on two points briefly: 

1)  The Alaska Constitution is a derivative of the US Constitution, meaning, it must conform in large part to the US Constitution.  If there were no provisions in the US Constitution (the parent), then how could that so-called “right” be found or recognized in Alaska’s Constitution (the child)?

2)  In order for there to be a constitutional right to abortion in Alaska’s Constitution, how must that “right” be balanced against other rights?

Article 1, Section 1 of Alaska’s Constitution is labeled as, “Inherent Rights.”
First of the Inherent Rights is the right to life:

“This constitution is dedicated to the principles that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness…” and “…all persons are equal and entitled to equal rights, opportunities, and protection under the law…”

Since that is true, how many rights must babies lose in Article 1, Section 1 of Alaska’s Constitution in order for abortion to be a constitutional right – let alone legal?

Finally, if babies are persons, then in order to withhold their constitutional rights, it seems to follow that the constitution must have been amended at some point, right?  But that has not happened.

So on this simple logical conclusion, that there is no abortion right in the US Constitution, and there is no abortion right in Alaska’s Constitution, but there IS an inherent right to life, equal rights, and protections under the law, then killing children must necessarily be, and have been illegal.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on these concepts.  Email me HERE.



Alaska Right to Life is initiating a grassroots campaign to recognize babies waiting to be born as legal persons and call for equal protection and equal justice by city and borough level resolutions, beginning with the Kenai Peninsula Borough.

Read more and sign the petition HERE


It seems that even among pro-lifers the lie that abortions are somehow “medically necessary” is being adopted as the end of abortion becomes more and more of a reality.

Once we peel back the camouflage, this argument is almost always rooted in pro-abortion beliefs, and it comes up as a final stall tactic when every other argument for abortion is dismantled.

The people that raise this argument are rarely sincere – you can tell immediately when you ask them to defend the concept:

Pro-Abortion Challenge:  “Yeah, but what about when the mother’s life is at risk… when she and the fetus will die if she doesn’t terminate the pregnancy?”

Pro-Life Response:  “Are you talking about ectopic pregnancies?  If so, then the procedure that ends the baby’s life shows the limitations of our medical technology, since we cannot reliably remove the baby from the fallopian tubes and implant him in his mother’s uterus.  The intent is to save them both, but medical technology makes that essentially impossible.”

“Is there some other scenario you’re thinking of?”

Pro-Abortion Challenge:  “Yeah, what about when she has cancer, or when she, the baby, or both will die in a complicated delivery?” 

Pro-Life Response:  “How did you come to the conclusion that killing the baby will save the mother’s life?” 

Pro-Abortion Response:  “It happens all the time!”

Pro-Life Response:  “If the mother’s life is at risk, how long would it take to perform the abortion? 

Pro-Abortion Response:  Blank stare.

Pro-Life Response:  “Would the mother survive the 12 to 72 hours it would take to perform a high-risk or late-term abortion on a seriously sick or injured mother?”

Pro-Abortion Response:ANGER…  “So you’re saying the mother has to risk her life for her fetus?  What if she was raped?”

Pro-Life Response:  “Let’s focus on the original question about a mother dying if she isn’t able to have an abortion…  What procedure would the doctors use in the case of a complicated delivery to kill the baby and preserve the mother’s life? 

Pro-Abortion Response:ANGER…  “You don’t know the circumstances she’s facing.  What about…”

Pro-Life Response:  “It sounds like you’re more interested in protecting the legality of killing babies through abortion than you are in solving the problems that lead to, and follow unplanned – and even difficult pregnancies.  Am I getting that right?”

Pro-Abortion Response:ANGER…

I went through this challenge this past weekend at a gun show, of all places.  The fella I was talking to was sincere in his questions, but his underlying – probably unknown to him – motives were exposed when I asked him how the doctors would kill the baby in a complicated delivery.  Of course, that simply does not happen and his argument instantly fell apart.

Finally, please understand the questions are used to challenge the pro-abortion logic and do not in any way insinuate or justify any kind of medical necessity for killing babies.

For expert testimony and examples, please see Live Action’s conversation with a former abortionist:

“In cases where a pregnancy places a woman in danger of death or grave physical injury, a doctor more often than not doesn’t have 36 hours, much less 72 hours, to resolve the problem. Let me illustrate with a real-life case that I managed while at the Albany Medical Center. A patient arrived one night at 28 weeks gestation with severe pre-eclampsia or toxemia. Her blood pressure on admission was 220/160. A normal blood pressure is approximately 120/80. This patient’s pregnancy was a threat to her life and the life of her unborn child. She could very well be minutes or hours away from a major stroke.

This case was managed successfully by rapidly stabilizing the patient’s blood pressure and “terminating” her pregnancy by Cesarean section. She and her baby did well.

This is a typical case in the world of high-risk obstetrics. In most such cases, any attempt to perform an abortion “to save the mother’s life” would entail undue and dangerous delay in providing appropriate, truly life-saving care. During my time at Albany Medical Center, I managed hundreds of such cases by “terminating” pregnancies to save mothers’ lives. In all those cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.”You can read more HERE.

You can watch the interview HERE.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on these concepts.  Email me HERE.



Pro-Life Hoosiers filled the Indiana capital condemning SB1, a 20-week abortion ban that even Indiana Right to Life (often supports compromised bills, opposes total abortion bans) condemned as 

IRTL claims the bill “…goes through the motions on paper, but lacks any teeth to actually reduce abortions in Indiana by holding those who perform abortions or would intentionally skirt the law accountable with criminal consequences. As the bill reads now, the 8,000-plus abortions that take place annually in Indiana would continue unabated…”

Read more HERE and HERE.

Photo credit: Indiana Right to Life

We’ve heard from several friends in Indiana, all of them are condemning the Indiana Republicans for choosing SB1 over other legislation that would protect babies according to current law, “That human physical life begins when a human ovum is fertilized by a human sperm.”  IC 16-34-2-1.1.

It’s also worth noting that within just a couple days, thousands of pro-life Indianans filled the capital demanding SB1 be withdrawn in favor of truly pro-life legislation.  That is simply not possible in Alaska with our capital in Juneau.  Setting the cost of travel, lodging, food, and transportation aside, the travel and lodging industry simply could not handle such an influx of people coming to the capital.

Finally, similar legislation has been entertained here in Alaska – our republican legislators continue to flirt with bills that “go through the motions on paper, but lack any real teeth” to eliminate abortions.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on what’s happening in Indiana.  Email me HERE.


“His words as he tried to stab me a few hours ago were, ‘You’re done,’ but several attendees, including @EspositoforNY, quickly jumped into action & tackled the guy,” Zeldin tweeted.

The good news, Republican and pro-life governor candidate Zeldin was not seriously hurt and was able to continue his campaign rally.

The bad news, is we’re likely to see more of this behavior against those the secular left and the abortion lobby see as threats to their secular humanist religion.

Read more HERE and HERE

Photo credit: Lee Zeldin on Twitter


As Alaskans committed to ending abortion for over 45 years, we’re just like you – we’re everyday Alaskans with jobs, and families, living the Alaskan dream, and we want abortion to end and all innocent human lives protected – especially the most innocent and vulnerable.

Alaska Right To Life understands how hard it is to save a single life.  We continue to build coalitions with other ministries, churches, and other advocacy and political groups so that we can protect innocent human lives in any and every way possible.

We have helped tens of thousands of Alaskans get involved, serve in ministry, save babies, influence elections and legislation and save lives since 1973.

<<First Name>>, since Roe v Wade has been overruled, the Life at Conception Act becomes more urgently important than ever before.  Moving forward, we need your help protecting babies from being murdered in Alaska.

And because Roe has been overturned and nothing in Alaskan abortion law has changed, everything in the battle for babies’ lives must.

The first step in taking action to protect babies’ lives is signing the Life At Conception Act Petition.

Sign the petition


Sign the Life at Conception Act Petition

If you don’t know who your representatives are, click the link below to find your House and Senate Districts.

Find your Elected Representatives HERE

Calling your elected representatives is the next step.  

Call your State Senator
You can find your State Senator’s office and phone number HERE.

Call your House Representative
You can find your House Representative’s office and phone number HERE.

Call the Governor’s Office


Finally, if you can, chip in $35, $50, $100 or any amount you can afford.

Things have never been so certain, yet uncertain as they are today.Nothing in Alaska’s abortion law or court decrees changes with Roe overturned.EVERYTHING in Alaska’s abortion politics changes now that Roe is overruled.

Alaska’s abortion politics MUST change.

Now that Roe is gone, we know several things must change in Alaska: 

We must stop electing lawmakers who are indifferent to the killing of Alaskan babies. 

We must stop advocating for laws that conform to Roe v Wade or compromise on the humanity of babies waiting to be born.

We must surround every abortion facility in Alaska with ministries that help mothers struggling with unplanned and crisis pregnancies get the help and support they need to parent their babies.We must promote and support our Pregnancy Resource Centers – the need for their services must grow as access to abortion is restricted and eliminated.
<<First Name>>, with Roe v Wade overturned, Planned Parenthood and their Abortion Lobby in the Legislature are pulling out all the stops to protect what they have – abortion on demand from conception to birth, without exception, and paid for with your money and mine.

The battle for babies has never been more urgent than right now. 

If we are not successful in electing new legislators and a governor who will not compromise on the humanity of babies… 

If we are not successful in defining privacy in Alaska to exclude abortion…If we are not successful in prohibiting your money from paying for babies to be murdered…If we are not successful in advancing legislation that provides for equal protection and equal justice for babies…If we are not successful in surrounding every abortion facility in Alaska with ministries that serve mothers and protect their babies…

If we fail at protecting babies at the abortion center and in the halls of our Legislature, Alaska’s status as an ‘Abortion Safe State’ will be enshrined.

But just think about how this could turn out:

  • Babies are saved at every abortion facility
  • Activist judges removed from the bench
  • Equal protection and justice from conception are provided in our laws
  • Pregnancy Resource Centers provide care and help for mothers and their families
  • Babies are no longer murdered in Alaska


Patrick Martin

Alaska Right to Life

(907) 276-1912




PS:  It’s time to end abortion in Alaska.  Your donation today makes the LIFE At Conception Act a reality.
Please DONATE and help us make the LIFE At Conception Act the law and forever end abortion in Alaska.