Amarillo, Texas Voters Reject Sanctuary City for the Unborn Ordinance

On Tuesday, November 5, 2024, the City of Amarillo (pop. 202,408) became the first city in the history of Texas to reject a Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn (SCFTU) ordinance on a citywide ballot. While Live Action Victory’s 2024 Voter Guide and Texas Right To Life’s Texas Pro-Life 2024 Voter Guide encouraged Amarillo voters to vote in favor of Prop A, the majority of voters in the City of Amarillo did the exact opposite. A whopping 59.46 (40,392) voted AGAINST the measure, with only 40.54% (27,544) voting FOR the measure. Had the measure passed, Amarillo’s Prop A would have closed several loopholes in Texas pro-life laws by prohibiting the abortion trafficking of pregnant mothers and their unborn children through Amarillo and across state lines, the mailing of abortion-inducing drugs into the city, and the transportation and disposal of the remains of unborn children killed by elective abortions.

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

Many who assumed the City of Amarillo was one of the most conservative cities in America were shocked at the outcome of the election and the headlines which seemed to say it all. The Texas Tribune called the vote a “rare rebuke of ant-abortion movement in Texas.” The Dallas Morning News and Mother Jones highlighted the City of Amarillo as a “conservative Texas city” who defeated an “extreme abortion ban” and Jezebel called the vote a “rare win for a deep-red state.”

The ordinance was opposed by many influential leaders in the community, including: Mayor Cole Stanley, Councilman Tom Scherlen, Hope Choice Pregnancy Centers Executive Director Candy Gibbs, Randall County Assistant District Attorney and Planned Parenthood Texas Votes Speaker’s Bureau member Aubrey Birkenfeld, national Women’s March Executive Director Rachel O’Leary Carmona, and Claudia Stravato, former CEO of Planned Parenthood of Amarillo and the Texas Panhandle. Several local groups in the community also publicly opposed the measure, including: Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance (ARFA), Amarillo Freedom PAC, the Board of the Potter-Randall County Medical Society, the League of Women Voters of Amarillo, Potter County Democrat Party, the Randall County Democrat Party, and Conservative Patriots 4 Texas.

According to the Amarillo Globe-News, Mayor Stanley “expressed relief and pride in the voters decision.” Mayor Stanley told the local news outlet, “I’m super proud of the council for doing their job. Our job is to represent the people, not just those who voted for us, but everyone in Amarillo. We brought an extremely divisive issue to the public, and the people had their say.” Mayor Stanley went on to accuse the measure of not aligning with state law and called the measure “confusing as hell.” Councilman Scherlen also “expressed satisfaction with the outcome.”

On Tuesday, Women’s March celebrated the defeat of Prop A, posting on X:

“Amarillo showed up and won! Prop A—the abortion travel ban pushed by Christian extremists—has been defeated! Endless gratitude and love to the unstoppable women of Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance and everyone who showed up with us. Huge thanks to every single one of you who chipped in, made calls, and knocked on doors to help defeat this ordinance. This victory proves it: our rights are not up for grabs.”

The ACLU of Texas also celebrated the victory. Posting on X, they wrote,

“AMAZING: Voters in Amarillo, Texas, have rejected the city’s abortion travel ban. This victory comes after months of local organizing. The message is clear: Texans want to protect reproductive freedom — and will do so when given the opportunity.”

AVOW Texas, formerly NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, posted on their Facebook:

“Abortion bans and restrictions are deeply unpopular with the majority of Texans. Prop A was the first time an abortion travel ban was on the ballot post Roe and Amarillo voters overwhelmingly rejected it. Proponents of Prop A were counting on this extreme measure to pass without a fight. When we organize, we win!”

The statement that this was “the first time an abortion travel ban was on the ballot post Roe” is not true. Prop A was actually the sixth time an ordinance prohibiting abortion trafficking was on the ballot, period. In November 2022, five cities throughout the United States had abortion bans prohibiting abortion trafficking on citywide ballots. These cities were: Abilene, Texas; San Angelo, Texas; Plainview, Texas; Athens, Texas; and Curtis, Nebraska. Out of these five cities, the only city where voters did not pass the ordinance prohibiting abortion trafficking was Curtis, Nebraska. This makes Amarillo the second city in the nation where voters have rejected an ordinance prohibiting abortion trafficking and the first city in Texas where voters have rejected an ordinance prohibiting abortion trafficking.

In another Facebook post from AVOW Texas , Executive Director Raven Freeborn shared:

“Times feel scary and uncertain post-election, but the wins that abortion had in Amarillo and throughout the nation have us not only full of hope, but with a mandate of our path forward. We hope you join us in this fight. Abortion was on the ballot and a central issue in many campaigns across the nation. Political strategists have treated running openly on abortion as a liability, and yet where abortion really won, was when abortion was on the ballot by itself, detached from any party . . . What was on the ballot with Prop A was surveillance, the inability to go freely within and out of one’s community without threat and criminalization, the likelihood of punishment, fine, and incarceration, and Amarilloans overwhelmingly rejected it. These are some of the tenets that facism is built upon and continuing to educate our communities about these threats will not only keep Texans needing abortion care safer, but all of us safer.”

Several of the statements made by Freeborn, in this quote, are not true. If passed, Prop A would not have restricted the mother of the unborn child from going anywhere, did not make anything a criminal act, and did not allow for any fine or incarceration. One can only wonder what AVOW Texas’ blockwalkers said about Prop A when they went door to door throughout the city of Amarillo and if they were responsible for spreading much of the misinformation that was believed by citizens throughout Amarillo.

Deceptive Omissions

One of the local groups leading the charge against Prop A was the Amarillo Freedom PAC, led by ARFA co-founders Lindsay London and Courtney Brown. To better understand the origins of the Amarillo Freedom PAC, one must understand the origins of ARFA. ARFA grew out of the groundwork of Janda Raker’s Abortion Access Amarillo (AAA), formed in 2016. Brown and others volunteered with Raker and formed a partnership with Jane’s Due Process, which they still maintain today. In April 2023, at a special meeting at the Amarillo Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, Raker asked London to take over the leadership of AAA. While London and several allies at the meeting that day originally operated under the name AAA, the group decided “. . .to pivot and start a similar project but under a different name in hopes of being more palatable by not having the name ‘abortion’ at the forefront” and to have “. . .an initial focus of the civil engagement that we have taken part in with our civil government over the last year.” According to a presentation she gave at the Amarillo Unitarian Universalist Fellowship in June, ARFA was founded in July 2023 in response to the efforts to make Amarillo a SCFTU. Since ARFA needed a political action committee to fight Prop A, the Amarillo Freedom PAC was created with the intent to appeal to conservative voters.

The front page of Amarillo Freedom PAC’s website did not mention the word “abortion” or the phrase “reproductive rights” even once. Their website read, “Amarillo’s future is at risk. Vote against Prop A. Prop A threatens your personal freedoms and encourages lawsuits against your neighbors. It’s more than a travel ban – it’s government overreach.” Not a word about abortion.

The PAC’s website continued, “What is Prop A and Why Should You Care? Prop A is a dangerous ordinance that opens the door to lawsuits between neighbors and creates a travel ban for healthcare. It threatens personal freedoms and allows government overreach into the lives of Amarilloans.” Again, no mention of abortion.

Under the heading “KEY ISSUES” the website listed several reasons why one might want to oppose the ordinance:

• “Neighbor vs. Neighbor Lawsuits. Prop A pits Amarilloans against each other by allowing citizens to sue one another for private decisions.”
• “The Travel Ban. Prop A seeks to control your ability to travel out of state for legal healthcare options.”
• “Government Overreach. This ordinance is a direct violation of personal freedoms and sets a dangerous precedent for government interference into private lives.”

Still, not a word about abortion.

The website continued, “What’s at stake for Amarillo: Your rights, your community, and your voice. This ordinance doesn’t just impact those seeking healthcare out-of-state–it affects ALL Amarillo residents. From local businesses to families, Prop A represents a threat to the rights that keep our community safe and free.” A quote from an anonymous Amarillo resident reads, “Amarilloans should be able to make their own choices without fear of lawsuits, fines, or government interference.” Anyone reading the front page did not see the word “abortion” or the phrase “reproductive rights” even once.

The “conservative talk” used by members of ARFA was completely intentional. As ARFA co-founder Courtney Brown told The New Yorker, “It’s about using language that people in the heartland of the Panhandle can understand . . . Language that isn’t, you know, woke.” When blockwalking ARFA members used what they jokingly called “the conservative hanger” which read “PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS” in large letters with a picture of an eagle and a quote from Governor Greg Abbott. The quote read, “If you want to start a fight with Texans, just try taking away their freedom.”

Pro-Life Citizens Throughout Amarillo Respond to Prop A’s Defeat

While pro-abortion forces celebrated the defeat of Prop A, many pro-life citizens like Amarillo resident Steve Austin grieved the loss. Austin shared, “In Amarillo, it is still legal for organizations to take your underage daughter or granddaughter to Albuquerque, perform an abortion on them without your knowledge or permission, and there is nothing you can do about it, It is still legal. Amarillo will still have tons of aborted babies being deposited in our landfill from all over the country. Finally, we have no way to stop the distribution of the abortion pill in Amarillo. These have been voted on by the citizens of Amarillo and that is their wish. I’ll leave that for you to think about.”

Amarillo resident Cassie Greene shared, “I am grieved, especially with Mayor Cole Stanley and Candy Gibbs. Evil prevails when good men do nothing. In our case, evil prevails when good people do everything to fight against a pro-life ordinance. It is a shame, and it does not make sense. When your conservative pro-life Mayor stands up against an ordinance supported by some of the greatest conservative legislators in the state and the nation, you have to ask yourself, ‘Where is the disconnect?’”

Greene continued, “It is also disheartening that Candy Gibbs and her board at Hope Choice Pregnancy Centers did not stand united with us as we sought to love our unborn neighbors and their moms. We had the support of the most influential pro-life organizations in the state and in the nation. Yet, for some reason, we could not gain the support of one of the most influential pro-life organizations in our city. This was not for a lack of trying, that is for dang sure.”

Amarillo resident Bonnie Burnett shared, “I will not pretend this is not a devastating loss. It is. It was a gut punch.” Burnett placed the blame for the loss on community leaders who claim to be pro-life but whose public stances aided the pro-abortion opposition. Burnett’s strongest criticism was for Mayor Stanley going on a local Christian radio station, Kingdom Keys, proclaiming “You can be pro-life and still vote against Prop A.” Burnett shared, “the Bible is clear on this topic. The shedding of innocent blood is a SIN. We are called as Christians to protect the sanctity of ALL life and put legislation in place to do so.”

Burnett also placed blame on Candy Gibbs, sharing, “She grossly failed our community.” On May 28, Gibbs gave a twenty-two minute presentation before the Amarillo City Council expressing three issues she had with the SCFTU Ordinance. First, Gibbs took issue with the proposed ordinance’s support of Texas’ Alternatives to Abortion (Thriving Texas Families) program and the funds that are distributed to pregnancy centers across the state through organizations like the Texas Pregnancy Care Network. Second, Gibbs took issue with telling people they could not drive others to an abortion facility. And third, Gibbs took issue with the law not exempting parents and grandparents from being sued – if they were to assist in their daughter’s or granddaughter’s abortion. The twenty-two minute presentation by Gibbs was full of misinformation about the Alternatives to Abortion program. What made her presentation even more confusing was the fact that the Texas Heartbeat Act, which Gibbs claimed to support, allows for lawsuits against anyone who aids or abets an illegal abortion – even if the one who is aiding or abetting the illegal abortion is a parent or a grandparent. These statements made by Gibbs came after she and the Board of Directors of Hope Choice Pregnancy Centers received a letter from Thomas Glessner, President and Founder of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA). The letter from NIFLA, dated May 24, stated, “NIFLA fully supports the proposed Sanctuary City for the Unborn Ordinance which was brought forth by the citizen initiative petition in your city.”

The letter continued,

“NIFLA does not support and strongly opposes any changes to the ordinance that would add exceptions absent from any other Texas abortion law, as this would be inconsistent with state law and could have a detrimental effect across the state and the nation. If such an exception were to be added, it would also create a situation where pro-life leaders and organizations from across the state and the nation would likely feel compelled to weigh in on the matter and publicly address those who are advocating for such exceptions.”

Gibbs appeared to further disregard the warning from NIFLA that the exceptions she mentioned “could have a detrimental effect across the state and the nation” on May 30, as she shared the video of her speech before city council on Facebook, stating, “If you haven’t had the chance to watch this week’s council meeting regarding the petition for the Sanctuary City for the Unborn, you can watch below to hear my thoughts and my heart.” Burnett called Gibbs’ actions before the city council and before the City of Amarillo reckless, stating, “Her endorsement for Prop A would have encouraged our pro-life community in Amarillo to vote in favor of Prop A, which could have secured a win for Prop A. Yet she refused to give her open support and endorsement to a city ordinance that would have saved the lives of thousands of babies.” Burnett claimed Gibbs’ “lack of action” and her “tip-toeing around” this pro-life issue caused “more confusion and division” in their city. Burnett admonished Gibbs for failing to “stand up for life which is literally her job description” and stated, “This was gross negligence on her part and she completely dropped the ball.” Several individuals and churches who have long endorsed Hope Choice are considering cutting funding due to Gibbs’ lack of support for Prop A and her refusal to stand in unity with the statewide and national pro-life movement regarding Texas’ abortion laws.

The Fight Continues

During the campaign, advocates for Prop A had received much support from Dr. John Seago, President of Texas Right To Life. Upon hearing of Prop A’s defeat, Dr. Seago shared,

“The fact that national and state pro-abortion groups were able to defeat the citizen-led Pro-Life local ordinance in Amarillo is tragic. The tragedy of Prop A is compounded by the fact that these groups used some of the most manipulative and deceptive messaging that the Pro-Life movement in Texas has ever seen. These radical Pro-abortion groups like the Women’s March did not argue that voters should support abortion, instead they lied about Prop A, Texas Pro-Life laws, and poured in money to flood the city with false accusations against the measure that would appeal to conservatives and Christians in Amarillo.”

Seago continued,

“Pro-Life Proposition A would have enacted a carefully crafted ordinance that would allow Amarillo citizens to fight back against the new tactics the abortion industry is using to bring abortion pills into Texas and women and minors out-of-state for abortion. This was a good Pro-Life policy that I hope the citizens of Amarillo have not given up on yet.”

Several national news outlets across America paid close attention to the outcome of Prop A. Ballotpedia News listed Amarillo’s Proposition A and San Francisco’s Proposition O as #4 on their “top 15 ballot measures and trends to watch on election day.” The National Review stated Prop A had “important policy implications in the Lone Star State.” The New Yorker called Prop A “part of a bigger strategic play”, and NOTUS recognized Amarillo could very well be “the most consequential abortion fight of this election cycle.”

Despite the loss, the effort to end abortion trafficking in Amarillo is far from over. Pro-life organizations at the local, state, and national level intend to keep fighting for life in Amarillo and in cities and counties throughout the Panhandle.

LifeNews Note: Mark Lee Dickson lives in Texas and serves as a Director with Right to Life of East Texas and the founder of the Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn Initiative.

The post Amarillo, Texas Voters Reject Sanctuary City for the Unborn Ordinance appeared first on LifeNews.com.