Lubbock, Texas City Council Refuses to Stand with Justice
At the Tuesday November 17th City Council meeting, the Lubbock City Council demonstrated a complete abrogation of responsibility.
This meeting, running until after midnight Wednesday November 18th, was the scheduled public hearing for the Sanctuary City for Unborn ordinance, which would immediately outlaw abortion in the Lubbock city limits and be enforceable via a private enforcement mechanism.
Sixteen cities have passed the ordinance thus far. One city, Omaha, Texas walked back the ordinance to a non-binding resolution. The Lubbock City Council voted the ordinance down unanimously, despite four of the councilmen stating that they are pro-life. Juan Chadis, Randy Christian, Steve Massengale, and Mayor Dan Pope all made pro-life comments at the council meeting. Depending on how one interpreted the council comments, Jeff Griffith and Sheila Patterson-Harris seemed to make sympathetic comments as well. However, it seemed evident that Latrelle Joy was either pro-abortion or indifferent.
Every councilman cited Roe v. Wade as the “law of the land.” Councilman Jeff Griffith said, “This is about, in my opinion, the law. Whether you like it or not, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land. It has been.” Upon the making of this statement, someone from the council chambers spoke up in disagreement. Mayor Dan Pope quickly slammed down his gavel. “Listen. Let me be real clear, okay? We’ve listened all night long. It’s our time to talk. If you can’t keep your mouth shut you need to leave the chambers, okay? Are we clear on that?”
Mayor Pope stared out across the council chambers where many residents had their phones recording their every word. “I love all the cameras too,” said Pope. “We are being streamed live everywhere. Which is good. Please continue Mr. Griffith.” Councilman Griffith continued, “The point is that, in my opinion it is not a perfect document. It’s not enforceable . . . It’s not about a personal belief. It’s about law.”
Councilman Juan Chadis said, "I also value life, but this ordinance, as I view it, is not enforceable . . . I took an oath of office and it says to defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States and of this State, so help me God. And I take that seriously . . . My concern is if this ordinance were to pass, we as a city would be exposed to a costly legal battle." Chadis continued, “Until the Supreme Court changes opinion on Roe v. Wade I personally cannot support and will not support the Sanctuary for the Unborn in the City of Lubbock.”
Speaking of abortion Councilman Randy Christian said, “I personally abhor it, the thought of it, and most certainly the act of it. My personal belief is that birth is God’s most miraculous way of beginning this precious gift called life. This earthly journey that he and he alone has mapped out for each one of us and the duration of this gift is in his hands.” It is uncertain if Councilman Christian simply misspoke and meant to say conception was the beginning of life or if he actually believes that birth is when life begins.
Councilman Christian mentioned that he talked to a number of people for their expertise, emphasizing that none of them currently serve as elected officials. “I also reached out to several political and legal university scholars regarding this issue. All graciously offered me guidance, wisdom, and their opinion regarding the Sanctuary City ordinance. After reviewing the ordinance, every one of them emphatically stated that it was unconstitutional and, if enacted, prepare for legal action to be taken against our city that well could cost the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. Let me repeat, unconstitutional, unenforceable, and costly.” Councilman Christian never publicly named any of the experts he claimed to have talked to.
Christian said, “If there was a constitutional pro-life ordinance, my fellow citizens, I would not hesitate to sign it immediately. But that is not the case as long as Roe v. Wade is the law of the land. In closing, I believe as long as Roe v. Wade is in place this ordinance is unconstitutional, unenforceable, and costly to our city . . . I am pro-life, but I have a sworn duty to follow the law.”
Councilwoman Sheila Patterson-Harris said, “My concern with this has been that the ordinance is void based on the law of the land.”
Councilman Steve Massengale said, “I believe all lives matter. I believe young and old, the unborn, sick, homeless, foster [matter]. They’re all important. I believe that we have to fight for those who cannot fight for themselves, but this is not the way to tackle this one. This ordinance is unconstitutional, unenforceable, and I cannot support it.”
Councilwoman Latrelle Joy said, “until Roe v. Wade is overturned, or some other [federal] action is taken, it is the law."
One wonders what the councilmen would have done during the Dred Scott era. If presented an ordinance that ensured the citizenship of Black Americans, would they have voted it down because Dred Scott v. Sandford was the “law of the land?” While there is no doubt that Supreme Court decisions are authoritative, they are not laws. Every junior high student could tell you the basics of the separation of powers and of checks and balances. Simply put, the Supreme Court does not make laws. Similarly, it does not remove laws from the books. The Supreme Court renders certain laws unenforceable.
The Court is not absolute and can be fallible. This is demonstrated by the later overturning of Dred Scott v. Sandford by the 13th and 14th Amendments. Furthermore, there is a whole list of overturned Supreme Court cases found here. The Supreme Court may make mistakes regarding the constitutionality of an issue. These mistakes often happen by Judicial Activism (i.e. Constitutional Eisegesis, reading one’s presuppositions into the text).
Thomas Jefferson, a Founding Father, writer of the Declaration of Independence, and third President of the United States apocryphally said, “If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.” This legendary quote seems to be a paraphrase of the Declaration. Similarly, Martin Luther King Jr. actually said, “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” America is a nation of freedom because of the philosophy of civil disobedience and resistance. If we should disobey unjust laws, how much more should we fight unjust Supreme Court rulings?
During the public hearing, citizens were frequently reminded to stay on topic and speak directly to the ordinance. Many personal testimonies and moral arguments were cut off. John Seago, the Legislative Director with Texas Right to Life, came from Austin, Texas to discuss the actual mechanisms outlined in the ordinance. If anyone spoke directly to the ordinance, it was Mr. Seago. Nonetheless, he was chastised by Mayor Pope for “talking down” to the council “as if we [the Council] haven’t read the ordinance. Don’t act like we don’t know what it says,” Mayor Pope said.
After Mr. Seago made claims directed to refute the legal counsel given to the City by Olson & Olson, a law firm with familial ties to Planned Parenthood, Mayor Pope made some interesting comments. He said to the effect of, “There are many things that went on when we discussed the ordinance with Olson & Olson that you don’t know about due to attorney-client privilege.” While it is true that no one knows exactly what was said to the City Council by Art Pertile from Olson & Olson, the City released a statement which contained the main points of Olson & Olson.
While the Council hired a law firm with family ties to Planned Parenthood, the councilmen disparaged the offer of pro bono legal counsel and defense by Jonathan F. Mitchell, the former Solicitor General of the State of Texas. They talked about him as if he were a ghost or an imposter who pretended to be a lawyer. They acted as if he was less legitimate because he was appointed to his position as opposed to having been elected to his position. They claimed that him being retained would be a massive conflict of interest. They also said that Mitchell had not made a public comment on the constitutionality of the ordinance. Lawyer and Councilwoman Latrelle implied that Mitchell knew the ordinance was unconstitutional but wanted to defend it anyways to push some radical agenda (as if NOT killing babies is radical).
The Council disparaged state law makers, especially State Senator Charles Perry, State Representative Dustin Burrows and State Representative John Frullo.
Senator Perry, who spoke before the Council with humility and kindness at the hearing, was accused of seeking political status and using the Sanctuary City ordinance as a stunt.
Senator Perry argued that this was not a stunt, pointing to the fact that both he and Representative Burrows had signed a letter with other State Senators and Representatives in support of the City of Big Spring outlawing abortion back in January.
Additionally, the City Councilmen were presented with a letter signed by nine attorneys throughout the state of Texas who all attested to the legality of the ordinance and the flawed arguments of Olson & Olson, the Mayor, and the Lubbock City Council.
The attorneys who signed onto the letter were: Jerri Ward (Austin, Texas), Kellye SoRelle (Granbury, Texas), Olivia Ponce (Marshall, Texas) Chris Carnohan (Abilene, Texas), Dustin Burrows (Lubbock, Texas), Cole Shooter (Lubbock, Texas), Frank G. Dobrovolny (Jacksonville, Texas), Elisha M. Hollis (Greenville, Texas), and Katie Nielsen (Carthage, Texas).
The attorneys wrote,
“Mayor Pope and several city council members have been asserting that the proposed ordinance violates the federal Constitution, but they are mistaken. Abortion is not a constitutional right, and there is no language anywhere in the Constitution that even remotely suggests that anti-abortion laws are unconstitutional. Although the Supreme Court invented a right to abortion in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), the Court’s holding merely prevents states or localities from enforcing abortion bans until Roe is overruled. It does not prevent states or localities from enacting abortion bans, so long as the city’s enforcement of its ban is delayed until the Supreme Court overrules Roe. The proposed ordinance is consistent with Roe because it specifically prohibits the city or its officials from enforcing the ordinance until they obtain a declaratory judgment from a court that the enforcement of the ordinance will comport with Supreme Court precedent. Instead, the ordinance allows the abortion ban to be enforced only through private citizen suits, and enforcement mechanisms of that sort will not expose the city to any liability. See Okpalobi v. Foster, 244 F.3d 405, 426-29 (5th Cir 2001) (en banc).”
The letter continues,
“If city council members decide to reject the proposed ordinance, they should do so only if they believe that the city of Lubbock will be better served by having Planned Parenthood performing abortions within the city limits. They should not reject the proposed ordinance on the belief that its enactment would somehow violate city law or the U.S. Constitution, and they should not use Olson & Olson’s flawed and unsupported analysis as an excuse to oppose the ordinance.”
In an attempt to discredit the ordinance and convince the citizens that they had been “used and misled,” lawyer and Councilwoman Latrelle Joy called the private enforcement mechanism “scary.” To her, the “scary” part of the ordinance was the provision that an abortionist would be at any and all times liable in tort for the children he murders. This provision is so scary to her that anyone who does not find it scary should “get on your knees.”
This was said by the same woman who lectured the citizens of Lubbock for using Scripture via a ridiculous philosophy of ‘separation of Church and State’ that no lawyer nor learned governmental figure could reasonably hold. “Those who quoted Scripture to us, remember separation of Church and State?” asked Joy. Councilwoman Joy seemed to imply that no religious view could ever be a valid reason for advocacy as if the Constitution were not written and signed by Christians and Deists influenced by Judeo-Christian values.
Additionally, while the Council was responding to the citizen comments, Joy scolded a citizen, Skyler Wachsmann, for shaking his head silently in disagreement. “Is your head loose…or what?” she said. The member looked around confusedly before she identified him directly. “Mr. Cowboy Hat… stop shaking your head.”
“I’ll do what I want,” Wachsmann replied, “It’s my city.” It was at this point that Mayor Pope banged his gavel and proceeded to inform this attacked citizen that he was out of order despite the fact that he was addressed directly by an antagonistic Joy. Wachsmann was a member of the committee that started the petition to force the Council to consider the ordinance.
While the Lubbock City Council paid lip service to the ‘right to life,’ ultimately the councilmen were unwilling to take a courageous stand for what is right. They are guilty of the sin of omission. They had an opportunity to pass an ordinance that would protect life. When the first baby is killed in Lubbock, Texas, after Planned Parenthood starts murdering babies sometime in early 2021, the city councilmen will have blood on their heads. No, they are not murderers de jure. But, yes, they will be, by sin of omission, complicit with the heinous deaths of children. Ultimately, the councilmen acted in an un-American way. Two quotes by two of the greatest presidents demonstrate this.
General George Washington penned this during the Revolutionary War. He said, “The General hopes and trusts, that every officer and man, will endeavour so to live, and act, as becomes a Christian Soldier defending the dearest Rights and Liberties of his country.”
President Abraham Lincoln said, when asked if he believed God was on the Union’s side during the Civil War, “Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right.”
The American philosophy, which is founded on Western Judeo-Christian principles, necessitates the violation of unjust laws and precedents, especially those that kill innocent children. (It should be noted that the proposed ordinance is legal even under a post-Roe framework. See an explanation of that here.)
Dennis Prager, a Conservative Jewish commentator, radio show host, and author said in his commentary on the Book of Exodus that the real problem facing America is not a lack of basic decency; many people have that. (Think of the idea of the ‘silent majority.’) The problem is a general lack of courage. If a man intellectually assents to the idea of virtue and lives a generally decent life, he might be called a good man. However, living a quiet life and assenting to the idea of morality does not challenge injustice. Courage is the ability to take one’s conviction and share them with society. Courage is putting asides one’s insecurities and fears and trusting in the power of the Providence of God and acting as if good deeds matter.
The Lubbock City Council showed great cowardice when presented an opportunity to protect its citizens. Praise God that the people of Lubbock are bold and brave. They are soon to present the City Council with a formal request that the ordinance be sent to a referendum in May 2021. If the initiating committee of the petition, which put the Sanctuary City ordinance before the council, presents this request to the City, the City Charter necessitates that a referendum be held.
The City Council failed to take responsibility for the welfare of Lubbock citizens. Members from Raiders Defending Life, Young Conservatives of Texas at Texas Tech, Project Destiny, Lubbock Area Republican Women, West Texas for Life, Texas Right To Life, Right to Life of East Texas, and several church leaders were all present at the gathering and will continue to fight for the unborn of the City of Lubbock and the greater Lubbock area.
The councilmen are the terrible manifestation of this quote attributed to Edmund Burke, an Irish statesman, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
Mitchell D. Cochran is from Midland, Texas and is a graduate of Lubbock Christian University where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology. He is currently attending Calvary University for his Master of Arts in Biblical Counseling. Mitchell currently resides in Lubbock, Texas with his wife Katherine.
