Rosa Lacuna was examined by her physician, had an ultrasound, and was told she
was 6-8 weeks pregnant. When she asked if it was a “baby in there,” she was told,
“don’t be stupid, it’s only blood.” Following an abortion, Rosa experienced
bleeding and was admitted to a hospital. When she asked a nurse what had
happened, she was told that “the doctor left parts of the baby inside of you.” At
this point, Rosa realized it was a baby. Subsequently, her mental health
deteriorated, and she was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Rosa filed a lawsuit, and both the district and appellate courts agreed that she
should have been fully informed, including being told that she was carrying a
human being. However, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the abortionist
was under no obligation to give her the information she had asked about – that
she was carrying a baby! Citing the 35-year-old
Roe v. Wade ruling, the court
reasoned that the abortionist is not compelled to provide this information
because there are “different scientific, moral, or philosophical viewpoint on the
issue of when life begins.”

We believe the New Jersey Supreme Court is wrong. Dramatic changes in science
and medicine since 1973 provide evidence as to the humanity of the unborn
baby, such as ultrasound that shows fetal development and DNA. To be fully
informed, it is essential for women to have this information.
Contact Us
The Facts of the Case
What is an amicus brief?
The United States Supreme Court declined to hear this important case. This
means the New Jersey State Supreme Court stands, allowing an abortionist to
provide false and misleading information to a pregnant woman regarding the life
she carries within her. This decline does not mean the U.S. Supreme Court agrees
with the New Jersey ruling. The U.S. Supreme Court did not rule of the merits of
the case. The Trinity Legal Center filed an amides brief in this case on behalf of
the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Alveda
King (niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.), Caron Strong, Director of our Women's
Council on Abortion, and other women hurt by abortion. The brief also
represented Sandra Cano, who was "Mary Doe" in the
Doe v. Bolton case. Sandra
never wanted, sought, or had an abortion, and she wants to see an end to
  Read Brief               Read Press Release
An amicus brief, also called a friend of the court brief, allows individuals or
organizations that are not part of the case to present to a perspective and provide
evidence that might not otherwise be available to the court.

In 2007, the United States Supreme Court cited an amides brief written by Linda
Sheeter representing Sandra Cano, who was "Mary Doe" in the
Doe v. Bolton case,
and 180 women hurt by abortion. It was the only brief of 50 cited by the Court in
the partial birth abortion case,
Carhart v. Gonzales.
Trinity Legal Center
is a nonprofit organization
To learn more,
click here
"We believe the
New Jersey
Supreme Court
is wrong."
The Acuna Case