The Alaska Code of Judicial Conduct (Canon 3E) clearly says: "...a judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned..." 

Here are some very simple facts - 

• In 2001, the law firm Suddock and Schleuss joined forces with Planned Parenthood and the ACLU in a lawsuit against the State of Alaska regarding Medicaid payments for abortions.
• Fast forward 13 years and once again, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU are suing the State of Alaska over Medicaid payments for abortions.
• Tomorrow, February 3rd at 11am in the Nesbitt Courthouse, a Judge will be presiding over a hearing in which Planned Parenthood and the ACLU will be asking the judge for a temporary restraining order (TRO) that would shut down a regulation taking effect TODAY that defines in neutral medical terms when an abortion is "medically necessary" and by default, when that procedure is elective.
• The Judge's name? John Suddock. That's right. The same Suddock whose firm in 2001 was representing the plaintiffs in a case involving the very same issue.

You don't have to even be a first year law student to smell this one out.  Judge Suddock's impartiality is not in a place to be "reasonably questioned."  It is most firmly planted in the absolutely questioned column. The only acceptable solution is for Judge Suddock to recuse himself from the Planned Parenthood vs. William Streur (Commissioner of the State of AK DHSS) case immediately.

Any failure of the judge to do so will severely damage the public's confidence in the impartiality of the court system.

Please take action now, as Judge Suddock is expected to preside over the hearing at 11:00am tomorrow, Monday, February 3rd, at the Nesbitt Courthouse downtown.  Be polite but firm. Judge Suddock has a conflict of interest and should step down from this case.  

Judge John Suddock 
907-264-0418

Christine Johnson, Administrative Director
Alaska Court System
907-264-0548
[email protected]

Nancy Meade, General Counsel, Alaska Court System
907-264-8264
[email protected]

Cynthia Lee, Clerk of the Trial Court
907-264-0671
[email protected] 

In a remarkably arrogant move, the Court has placed another Judge with a serious conflict of interest on the latest Planned Parenthood lawsuit against the State regarding the "medically necessary" abortion regulations implemented recently.

As you know if you've been following this with us, the initial Judge assigned to the case, Judge Mark Rindner was identified as having multiple conflicts of interest including working for the ACLU, one of the plaintiffs in the case.  In addition, Judge Rindner's wife, Christine Schleuss, was hired by Planned Parenthood, the other plaintiff in the case, to sue the state of Alaska back in 1998 over THE VERY SAME ISSUE that is involved in this recent lawsuit: Medicaid funding of abortion.

The State of Alaska, the defendant in this case, successfully asked Judge Rindner to be removed from this case. That's the good news.  He was then replaced today by Judge Gregory Miller who seemingly had no conflict but then, Judge Miller recused himself from the case and the Court, inexplicably, replaced Miller with Judge John Suddock.

Judge Suddock just happens to be the former lawfirm partner of the very same Christine Schleuss who was hired by Planned Parenthood in the original Medicaid funding of abortion case.

If you are dizzy with the kind of nepotism and mind-numbing games that are being played by our third branch of Government...join the gang.

So, we are AGAIN asking ALL OF YOU and even those of you who haven't yet, to engage again based on the very simple fact that Judge John Suddock has a serious conflict of interest with his former law firm partner, Christine Schleuss, being counsel on this same matter previously. 

These activist judges need to know that the law is above this kind of manipulation and ethical violations.

Again, here are the people to contact NOW. One more time, we're asking you to make sure justice is served. It's late in the day but your voice matters and makes a difference.

Christine Johnson, Admin Director, Alaska Court System
907-264-0548
[email protected]

Nancy Meade, General Counsel, Alaska Court System
907-264-8264
[email protected]

Cynthia Lee, Clerk of the Trial Court
907-264-0671
[email protected]

TODAY at 3:00pm, a serious conflict of interest will unfold at the Nesbitt Courthouse in downtown Anchorage unless many more Alaskans step forward right now and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !

Planned Parenthood's latest lawsuit against the State of Alaska is essentially trying to mandate that ELECTIVE abortions are paid for through the State's Medicaid program.  

NO OTHER ELECTIVE PROCEDURE IS PAID FOR BY MEDICAID but this doesn't stop the non-sensical abortion on demand crowd from trying to force you and I to pay for elective abortions.

We're very confident that the rule of law will be upheld in Court but NOT UNLESS the current Judge, Mark Rindnder, is recused or taken off this case. Rindner represented and is a card carrying member of the ACLU, one of the plaintiffs in this case.  His wife, Christine Schleuss, was hired by Planned Parenthood, the other plaintiff in the case, to sue the state of Alaska back in 1998 over THE VERY SAME ISSUE that is involved in yesterday's lawsuit: Medicaid funding of abortion.

This newest lawsuit could have been assigned to any one of 14 judges in Anchorage who normally handle civil lawsuits. But it just "happened" to be assigned to Judge Mark Rindner.  

So...we have Planned Parenthood being helped by the ACLU in a lawsuit against the State -- and the judge involved is married to a former Planned Parenthood attorney, and the judge himself is a former member of the ACLU and formerly worked as an attorney for them.  

The Alaska Code of Judicial Conduct (Canon 3E) clearly says: "...a judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned..."

This incidence is a poster child for "conflict of interest".  Judge Mark Rindner should recuse himself immediately from this case. At 3:30pm TODAY, he is scheduled to hear the case where Planned Parenthood will be asking for a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the new regulation that is expected to take affect this Sunday.  That would stop the regulation in its tracks. We can't let this happen.

Take action: please take a moment and contact the staff members below of the Alaska Court System.  Tell them you believe Judge Mark Rindner should recuse himself immediately from this case: Planned Parenthood vs. William Streur.

Any failure of the judge to do so will severely damage the public's confidence in the impartiality of the court system.

Here are the people to contact NOW - 

Christine Johnson, Admin Director, Alaska Court System
907-264-0548
[email protected]

Nancy Meade, General Counsel, Alaska Court System
907-264-8264
[email protected]

Cynthia Lee, Clerk of the Trial Court
907-264-0671
[email protected]

Planned Parenthood's Cozy Relationship with Alaska Judge

Does anyone think it's a coincidence that Planned Parenthood's latest lawsuit against the State of Alaska was assigned to a judge who is married to an attorney who used to work for.... Planned Parenthood?

You read that right: yesterday, Planned Parenthood sued the Department of Health & Social Services over the new regulations that are aimed at stopping public funding of abortions that are purely elective, i.e., those that have no medical purpose whatsoever.

The lawsuit could have been assigned to any one of 14 judges in Anchorage who normally handle civil lawsuits.  But it just "happened" to be assigned to Judge Mark Rindner.  Rindner's wife, Christine Schleuss, was hired by Planned Parenthood to sue the State of Alaska back in 1998 over the very same issue that is involved in yesterday's lawsuit: Medicaid funding of abortion.

But it gets worse: the ACLU is helping represent Planned Parenthood in this lawsuit.  Judge Mark Rindner, when he applied to be a judge back in 2000, disclosed that he was a card-carrying member of the ACLU.  Beyond that, Judge Rindner actually worked as a cooperating attorney for the Alaska Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in a 1999 lawsuit against the Municipality of Anchorage's curfew law.

So...we have Planned Parenthood being helped by the ACLU in a lawsuit against the State -- and the judge involved is married to a former Planned Parenthood attorney, and the judge himself is a former member of the ACLU and formerly worked as an attorney for them.  Can anyone say "conflict of interest?"  Judge Mark Rindner should recuse himself immediately from this case.

The Alaska Code of Judicial Conduct (Canon 3E) clearly says: "...a judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned..." 

Alaska Family Action urges citizens to speak up NOW. The new regulation is set to take affect this coming Monday, February 3rd but Judge Rindner, if kept on this case, has the ability to put the regulation on hold. 

Please take action: Contact the staff members below of the Alaska Court System.  Tell them you believe Judge Mark Rindner should recuse himself immediately from this case: Planned Parenthood vs. William Streur.

Any failure of the judge to do so will severely damage the public's confidence in the impartiality of the court system.

Christine Johnson, Administrative Director
Alaska Court System
907-264-0548
[email protected]

Nancy Meade, General Counsel, Alaska Court System
907-264-8264
[email protected]

Cynthia Lee, Clerk of the Trial Court
907-264-0671
[email protected]

With the Legislative session well under way, it's time to thank some wise public officials who've signed on as co-sponsors of SJR9, the school choice bill Alaska Family Action is supporting. SJR9 will give Alaskans an opportunity in November on the General Election ballot to vote on a Constitutional Amendment that would allow public funds to follow student to the school of their parent's choice that best fits their child's needs.

Click HERE for a wonderfully enlightening, short piece on how school choice improves public education. Exactly the opposite of what the naysayers are wanting Alaskans to believe.

Senator Mike Dunleavy is the primary sponsor of the bill. Here are the others who need to be thanked now as this may come up for a vote any day and we know they are getting pushback from the anti-school choice crowd.

PLEASE CALL OR E-MAIL TO THANK THESE SJR9 CO-SPONSORS TODAY !

• Senator Lesil McGuire - Anchorage
• Senator Anna Fairclough - Eagle River
• Senator Fred Dyson - Eagle River
• Senator Pete Kelly - Fairbanks
• Senator John Coghill - North Pole
• Senator Cathy Giessel - Anchorage
• Senator Charlie Huggins - Wasilla

From flying to the Capitol in Juneau, where I am right now working on pro-family legislation, to bringing up nationally recognized voices like Ravi Zacharias, General Boykin, Star Parker, Dr. Wayne Grudem and former Governor Mike Huckabee, Alaska Family Action spends money with Alaska Airlines on an on-going basis. 

Did you know that one of the best ways you can support our ministry is to donate airline miles ? 

Every mile donated helps us to have vital, face-to-face time with legislators who are often being inundated with groups like Planned Parenthood and the ACLU that have big budgets and full-time lobbyists opposing any pro-life, pro-family bills we're working on.  

Every mile donated gives us more opportunities to bring up leading social conservative thinkers, policy makers and theological minds who help us to educate the public on the importance of transforming the culture through an engaged and Biblically-minded citizenry. 

Once donated, your miles will never expire and are used to support our efforts to build a culture of life, protect natural marriage, open up school choice opportunities and protect our religious liberties. Donating miles is a simple and very effective way you can link arms with our ministry.

If you are in a position to donate Alaska Airline miles, please send an e-mail to [email protected] or call 907.279.2825 and we'll provide our mileage account number to you to make the transfer.

Thanks as always for your support of and prayers on behalf of Alaska Family Action.

Alaska Family Action encourages residents in Anchorage and surrounding areas to attend a townhall on School Choice taking place next Tuesday, January 28th at 7:00pm at Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton School located on Huffman Road.

Former Anchorage Mayor Tom Fink and David Boyle, Executive Director of the Alaska Policy Forum, will be presenting information on SJR9, a bill currently being considered in the Alaska Legislature that would allow public funds to follow a student to whichever school his or her parents believe is best for their child.

Introduced by Senator Mike Dunleavy - (R) Wasilla and co-sponsored by Senators Dyson, Kelly, Coghill and Giessel, SJR9 would place a constitutional amendment before voters on the November 2014 General Election and, according to Dunleavy's Sponsor Statement, "clarifies the question on the constitutionality of current educational practices. More than that, the ballot question allows the voters to decide whether to maintain or abolish the restrictions on the use of public dollars for the education of children. SJR9 gives the voters the power to decide what is right for their them, their families and the State of Alaska."

The townhall coincides with the National School Choice Week taking place January 26th through February 1st in thousands of communities across America.  

Alaska Family Action is vigorously supporting SJR9 and urges all interested citizens to attend this informative gathering. Again, please plan on attending next week's event taking place on Tuesday, January 28th at 7:00pm at Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton School.

Are you familiar with the school choice bill moving down in Juneau now ? Are you aware of how it can help your family and future generations of Alaskans ?

It's time to get educated about this issue and let legislators know this is a priority.

School choice gives parents the power and freedom to choose the type of education that is best for their child - regardless of income level or what zip code you live in.

Because as every parent knows, each child is different and in education, one size does not fit all. 

A great article was written recently for the Catholic Anchor that summarizes the issue better than most I've seen.  Click HERE to read it and share it with as many people as you can. 

Click HERE to go to the Alaskans for Choice in Education website and browse around. The more informed you are, the better you can articulate your position to family, friends, co-workers and eventually, to elected officials who will be deciding whether or not to give Alaskans the chance to vote on this issue.

The Alaska Policy Forum, a think tank based in Anchorage, has written extensively on this issue.  Click HERE and read about Frequently Asked Questions that arise regarding school choice.

Finally, click HERE to read Senator Mike Dunleavy's sponsor statement about SJR9 - the bill that will provide an opportunity for Alaskans to vote on this issue in November. With the legislative session starting today, Alaska Family Action will keep you posted in the coming weeks when we need you to contact your State Senator and Representative.

Ultimately, every Alaskan should be able to choose what education environment is best for their child. Public, private, charter, homeschool or a combination. Limiting our choices place unnecessary limits on our children and our future.

Utah and Oklahoma are the latest states with Constitutional Marriage amendments that are coming under fire from activist judges who are ruling against what the people have done in 27 states (starting with Alaska in 1998) to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

There is no doubt that Alaska's State Constitutional Amendment will come under assault in the near future.  It's just a matter of time. 

Now more than ever, it is urgent that we support legislation in support of returning to the states the power to define marriage.

That bill is the State Marriage Defense Act of 2014 (H.R. 3829), introduced by Congressman Randy Weber (R-Texas). This bill affirms a state's right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman and prevents the federal government from undermining a state's definition of marriage.

Alaska Family Action strongly encourages Alaskans to contact Congressman Don Young and urge him to co-sponsor this important legislation.

H.R. 3829 provides much needed guidance to  the federal government regarding how to determine a citizen's marital status when applying the approximately 1,000 federal laws and benefits that reference marriage. In the wake of the June 2013 Supreme Court ruling striking down the part of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that defined marriage between a man and woman, chaos has reigned as some federal agencies are now granting approval of same sex marriage in states that do not recognize such marriages. As a result, the federal government has begun granting certain federal marriage benefits to same sex couples, even when the couple resides in a state that does not recognize their marriage.

This bill directs the federal government to determine marital status by looking to the law of a person's state of residence. This simple rule ensures that the federal government won't undermine the 33 states which have enacted state policy in defense of natural marriage. 

For additional marriage on this important piece of legislation, please see the following links -

• Notre Dame Professor Gerald Bradley's pieces in Public Discourse and NRO
• An article by the Southern Baptist Convention's government affairs office, the ERLC
• The US. Catholic Conference of Bishops press release and letter of support
• Ryan Anderson's blog post on how the law would help the Utah fight over redefining marriage

Again, I urge you to contact Congressman Young and request co-sponsorship of this important bill that will protect and uphold our marriage amendment in the Alaska State Constitution.

In a recent article regarding the new State of Alaska regulation tightening the definition of what a "medically necessary" abortion is in order for public funds to pay for it, Rep. Beth Kerttula, D-Juneau makes the predictable statement that “Government should not be involved in these decisions, period.”

Here's a question for Rep. Kerttula.  What do the following medical procedures all have in common ?

• Dental implants
• Chiropractic massage or heat treatments
• Hearing aid maintenance
• Erectile Dysfunction Drugs
• More than one portable x-ray service daily
• Drugs to treat the terminal condition of hospice recipients
• Cosmetic surgery
• Breast implants

Well, it turns out each of these procedures have been determined to not be medically necessary and are therefore not reimbursable under Medicaid.

Time and again we hear from advocates of public funding for all abortions that it is a decision that can only be made between a woman and her doctor.  The reality though is that every day, Medicaid patients are told that there are certain procedures that do not qualify for public funding because they are elective. In other words, they are not medically necessary.

Who makes these determinations as to why certain procedures are not reimbursable? Who, Representative Kertulla, is getting between the physician and the patient ?

Answer – Medicaid bureaucrats.  The bottom line is that Government is always involved when Government is footing the bill. Think ObamaCare.

When asked in public testimony to define what an elective abortion is during a Senate Judiciary hearing on SB49, the bill Alaska Family Action is advocating for that puts the same regulation the State just implemented into law, Laura Einstein, chief counsel for Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, said that she had “heard of the concept" but just didn't really know what it was.
Under the Alaska Constitution, the State only has to pay for medically necessary abortions and of course that also means it isn't require to pay for elective abortions. As long as standard, neutral medical terms and concepts are used, the State has every right to determine what constitutes a medically necessary abortion.

In the 2001 State vs. Planned Parenthood case, the Alaska Supreme Court emphasized in its Opinion that that the Planned Parenthood case did “not concern State payment for elective abortions.”  The Court repeatedly limited the application of its decision to “medically necessary abortions” and in fact specifically and deliberately referred to the “medically necessary” nature of the abortions that it was addressing in the case on thirty-four (34) separate instances in its Opinion.

The State is not obligated to leave the definition of “medical necessity” for purposes of Medicaid funding in the sole and unquestioned discretion of the physician.  If that were the case, then the State would not be permitted to define the types of medical care that is covered by Medicaid and the types of medical care that is not.

Alaska abortion providers have proven themselves to be unreliable with respect to distinguishing between abortions that are medically necessary and those that are not.  For example Dr. Whitefield, one of Alaska’s leading abortion providers and now with Planned Parenthood, has testified under oath that he has consistently defined medical necessity to include women who believe pregnancy will interfere with their employment or education plans, as well as women who view their pregnancy as being an “affront” to them (which essentially means that the woman does not want to be pregnant).

With these new regulations now in place, and hopefully with SB49 getting to Governor Parnell's desk for his signature early this spring, abortion providers in Alaska will have to start being honest when they seek reimbursement for an elective procedure that ends the life of an unborn child.

This is a victory that should be celebrated not just by those who value the sanctity of every life. It should be seen as good public policy by any Alaskan who respects the rule of law.