Release – FACT CHECK: Despite Claims, Jackley Inaction Allowed Planned Parenthood to Break SD Law

FACT CHECK: Despite Claims, Jackley Inaction Allowed Planned Parenthood to Break SD Law

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – During a gubernatorial candidate forum this week, Marty Jackley claimed to “fight every day against Planned Parenthood…” However, Jackley has refused to hold the abortion provider accountable for two critical aspects of South Dakota’s landmark pro-life laws: (1) the immediate implementation of a 72-hour waiting period before an abortion is performed and (2) that a mother be told abortion “will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.”

While the 72-hour waiting period may have been able to go into effect immediately, Jackley refused to appeal a pro-Planned Parenthood ruling on the issue. Planned Parenthood “praised Jackley’s decision.”

Moreover, even after learning Planned Parenthood has been breaking the law by not clearly explaining to pregnant mothers that abortion will terminate a human life, Jackley has failed to enforce our laws and file a case against the abortion provider. As a result of Jackley’s failure to act, the South Dakota state legislature had to intervene in 2018 and pass legislation to ensure pregnant mothers are given this critical information.

“No one is questioning whether Marty Jackley is pro-life, but there is legitimate concern about how aggressively he’ll hold abortion providers like Planned Parenthood accountable” said Justin Brasell, Kristi for Governor Campaign Manager. “When he’s forced to act, he’ll likely respond. But when asked to proactively defend South Dakota’s pro-life laws and values, Jackley has been praised by Planned Parenthood for refusing to do it.”

BACKGROUND

JACKLEY’S CLAIM: “You’ve seen your Attorney General fighting every day against Planned Parenthood in South Dakota court rooms.” (Americans for Prosperity debate, May 1, 2018)

THE FACTS:

March 22, 2005 >> Governor Rounds signs legislation requiring that mothers be told “the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.”

March 28, 2011 >> Governor Daugaard signs legislation requiring a 72-hour waiting period before an abortion is performed.

July 26, 2011 >> Planned Parenthood “praised” Jackley’s decision to not fight for the 72-hour waiting period to take effect immediately. (“AG: State will not appeal abortion law injunction,” Rapid City Journal)

March 13, 2014 >> Legal documents provided to the Attorney General’s office demonstrate Planned Parenthood was breaking the law, but Jackley doesn’t act. The abortion provider failed to clearly explain that abortion will terminate a human life, as is required by the 2005 South Dakota law. Despite the revelation, Jackley did not file a lawsuit.

February 26, 2018 >> After Jackley refuses to act, the state legislature has to pass a bill to ensure pregnant mothers are told an abortion will terminate a human life. The legislation is signed by Governor Daugaard.

18 thoughts on “Release – FACT CHECK: Despite Claims, Jackley Inaction Allowed Planned Parenthood to Break SD Law”

  1. Good grief. The Noem Campaign is reaching and sounds pretty desperate here. Shades of the Jo campaign.

    1. I agree. Are we really going to attack a candidate who wants to let the police keep money they confiscate during roadside stops because he’s supposedly not authoritarian enough? Fire Brasell.

    2. Agreed. Jackley wins my vote based on these absurd attacks on his character.

  2. This is a legitimate question/comment, especially in a GOP primary.

    Is the “fact check” true? If not, tell us what is untrue. If true, is there a mitigating explanation? If in the middle, explain what we are missing.

  3. The mitigating factors are very clear in the cited articles Troy. I would think you would be hopping mad about this. First a bank shot trying to say Jackley is anti gun and now one insinuating he isn’t pro life. I feel like the Noem Campaign is better than this.

  4. I’m calling them as I see them. I called out Noem for the anti-gun implication and am still upset about it. But, I have not yet voted.

    I don’t think the news article is sufficient as time has passed. Where is this bigger lawsuit or did we get nothing from the bill? Regarding the informed consent, I see not explanation from Jackley that is persuasive.

  5. When Planned Parenthood is praising you …you are in trouble as a Republican

  6. It seems what I mostly see from Jackley are things that he wants to accomplish. Noem seems to mostly talk about what is wrong with Jackley. As a non-Republican, I will not be voting in the primary, but am pretty sure I will be voting for one of the two in the general election so I have no dog in this fight. If I were a Noem supporter, I would be wanting to see her policy issues.

  7. Sadly, this release has taken me by complete surprise and totally changed my image of Kristi. It has also moved my vote solidly to Marty. Anyone who even loosely follows our pro-life legislation knows that Jackley has been stalwart in its defense. Really disappointed in Kristi.

  8. I am and will remain a staunch Noem supporter, but I am disappointed in her campaign staff when they put out these types of messages. They simply have no positive value and if anything turn people away. This type of messaging does not reflect the Kristi Noem we know and will vote for. Her record of accomplishments, vision for South Dakota and most of all personal character are enough to carry this election. This type of messaging simply isn’t necessary and does nothing to further her campaign.

      1. She knows everything they are doing. She will do anything to win. That’s not south dakota.

  9. Has anybody noticed that she’s got this out of state Brazil dude throwing mud for her. He’s on her payroll. She’s tasked him to do this. I had to tighten my Facebook privacy because he was attacking that when I criticized a vote she made. It’s what he’s paid to do…..and then he’ll leave the state and the mess he was paid by her to create.
    Marty spoke at Right to Life Hour of Reflection. No secret about his prolife views.

  10. You guys realize how few people read the articles on this website? You think a campaign manager for a statewide campaign is wasting his time in the troll pits? Don’t flatter yourselves. Nobody really cares about these posts anyway. And hey Jackley supporters, if you didn’t want to see him called out on some bullshit, he shouldn’t have done some bullshit. Debunk it, disprove it, but don’t sit there whining about the candidate who DIDNT sign a clean campaign pledge when you think her staff isn’t putting out “clean” articles. You want to know why any logical and honest human being wouldn’t sign that silly piece of paper? Because you can’t be committed to the metaphorical ‘truthful campaign pledge. If her speech is being hindered for the sake of not hurting poor Marty’s feelings, she’ll never be able to speak the entire truth. Oh and the whole “I’m not supporting Kristi for calling out Jackley” line. That’s one heavily ignorant reason to change your vote. First off, obviously the candidate Kristi isn’t putting these stories out there. The staff is. You’re not voting for a campaign staff you’re voting for a candidate. Use some rationale, here. Theyre more than likely Jackley staff pretending to be “swayed” voters. I mean look at them, everyone who disagrees with them is automatically Justin Brasell. “Hey look everybody, I’m using logic and reasoning to disagree with the Jackley boys, I must be Noems campaign manager!”. This isn’t even a joke. Someone literally called me Justin on a different post. And they sit here calling Kristi desperate… Yeah as if we didn’t see Jackley’s over the top gratuitous repetition void of any real life experience. Oh but your family has a farm near Vale, that’s nice. When was the last time he drove a tractor on the ranch for work rather than his campaign photos? Then again this is the same guy who thought showing us his short shorts from his high school days was an effective campaign commercial. You all want to see what slinging mud looked like, so here ya go.

    1. I care about these posts and you seem to as well, you cared enough to share your thoughts. Candidates seem to care too, they’re paying for advertisement space.

      In summary, I gathered: it’s a waste of time to read SDWC, engage in dialogue on a platform that gives SD residents a voice, Noem is the only candidate with any real life experience and you should be a source for credible information and fashion advice. Got it, thanks;)

  11. I have a problem with the whole Planned Parenthood/Dept of Health thing. I really like Marty, but his claim that he has never refused to prosecute a complaint referred to his office by the department of Health is like me bragging that I have never denied food and water to a stray/feral camel.

    Jonathan Ellis did a story a while back (September 2016?) about how only 8% of the referred complaints of Medicaid fraud came from the agency which is supposed to be looking for and catching them.

    Do you remember the White Care Center blow-out? It was about 25 years ago.
    The Dept of Health had been making annual inspections. Nothing was done about the fraud being committed there until the entire licensed nursing staff, frustrated by the inaction, resigned in protest. Every one of them. I think it was about 18 RNs and LPNs, who finally had enough of being part of what could only be described as a criminal enterprise. That’s what it took to get the health department off their butts to do anything.

    This campaign has been focusing on the failure of the health department to refer Planned Parenthood to the AGs office. But they have also been ignoring Medicaid fraud, and they have been doing it for decades.

Comments are closed.