Randy

SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

We were all in the womb once

Thursday, January 22, 2026, 7:29 pm | Randy Thomasson

Are babies in the womb human beings?

This is the singularly most important question about whether it’s acceptable to abort a pregnancy. For if what the Left calls “tissue” is actually a little human being, then abortion is murder and never justified.

WATCH VIDEO: Abortion survivor Gianna Jessen testimony before Congress in 2017

This is the time of year when we need to remember the babies. Because the wrongly-decided Roe v. Wade baby-killing ruling was handed down on January 22, 1973.

This is the time of year when we need to remember the babies. Because the wrongly-decided Roe v. Wade baby-killing ruling was handed down on January 22, 1973.

And even though Roe is no more (it was rightly struck down in 2022), and we now have pro-life and pro-abortion states — in California, there are more abortions than ever.

The ruling Democrat Party politicians here have increased both surgical abortions and chemical abortions, and are bringing innocent babies (inside their mothers) from other states to then kill in California with taxpayer dollars.

See documentation of California’s pro-abortion laws:

Students for Life
Americans United for Life
LegalClarity.org
SaveCalifornia.com (see abortion expansion bills 2021-2025)

So, I encourage you — think about and value the humanity of babies in the womb. Remember, we were all there once. And this isn’t a little, growing dog or cat or kangaroo — it’s a developing baby HUMAN BEING, who deserves nurture, love, and protection.

… at the time the 14th Amendment was enacted, virtually every state understood and accepted that the legal phrase “person” included preborn life. Abortion was seen as the murder of a child. Objections to including preborn children under 14th Amendment protections, therefore, are nothing more than fundamental misunderstandings of the amendment.
Live Action: Why the 14th Amendment protects preborn human beings

Will election fraud finally be exposed in California?

Friday, January 16, 2026, 5:51 pm | Randy Thomasson

This California judge is wrong!

Because federal law REQUIRES states to keep voter registration data ACCURATE and CURRENT, and the federal government has jurisdiction to enforce the National Voter Registration Act (commonly known as the “motor voter law”).

I expect this unconstitutional, anti-election-accuracy opinion of Democrat Party U.S. Judge David O. Carter to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court for an easy ruling in favor of the Trump Administration’s and Judicial Watch’s efforts to examine the voter rolls and then require that illegals, dead people, and people who’ve moved be removed.

It’s a good start that the Trump Administration is fighting to get illegal aliens off the voter rolls. While we need the DOJ to do a full-scale investigation to expose California election fraud, it’s important and helpful that they’re demanding voter registration data from 40 states, and suing Democrat-Party-run states, including California.

Illegal aliens ARE registered to vote in California – by the millions. It was recently discovered that nearly half a million illegals requested excusal from California jury pools because they weren’t citizens – but they ARE registered voters.

Here’s the judge’s biased blatherings reported on Yahoo News:

A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit demanding California turn over its voter rolls, calling the request “unprecedented and illegal” and accusing the federal government of trying to “abridge the right of many Americans to cast their ballots.”

U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, a Clinton appointee based in Santa Ana, questioned the Justice Department’s motivations and called its lawsuit demanding voter data from California Secretary of State Shirley Weber not just an overreach into state-run elections, but a threat to American democracy.

“The centralization of this information by the federal government would have a chilling effect on voter registration which would inevitably lead to decreasing voter turnout as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose,” Carter wrote. “This risk threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy.”

On the U.S. DOJ website:

52 U.S.C. § 20507 … requires procedures to maintain accurate and current voter registration lists. These requirements govern, among other issues:

  • The date by which valid voter registration applications must be accepted and eligible persons registered,
  • Changes in a registrant’s address information,
  • Limits on removal of names from the voter registration list, and
  • Administration of a uniform, nondiscriminatory voter registration list maintenance program that complies with the Voting Rights Act (VRA”).

Other recent news on this initial battle to combat fraud by cleaning the voter rolls:

Jan 12: “Voter fraud alarm: 449,000 non-citizens reportedly excused from jury duty in California, raising red flags on voter rolls”

In a state already notorious for its lax election laws and ballooning non-citizen population, a resurfaced claim is reigniting fierce debate over voter integrity: Did nearly half a million Californians dodge jury duty by admitting they aren’t U.S. citizens—while somehow remaining on the voter registration lists? 

The allegation, which has circulated for years but gained fresh traction on social media this weekend, points to a potential massive loophole in California’s “Motor Voter” system, where DMV interactions automatically register eligible voters but, critics argue, fail to weed out the ineligible. 

The claim traces back to data from California’s Judicial Council, which reported around 449,000 individuals disqualified from jury service in a single fiscal year due to non-citizen status. Proponents of the narrative assert these same people were pulled from voter rolls for jury pools, exposing widespread non-citizen registration. 

“This is how OUT OF CONTROL California is,” blasted conservative influencer Mila Joy in a viral X post that garnered over 36,000 likes and millions of views. “449,000 REGISTERED VOTERS couldn’t perform jury duty because they weren’t citizens. But they are REGISTERED VOTERS! A half a million of them.” 

Jan 9: “Oregon election officials to begin purging rolls of inactive voters”

As Oregon kicks off a general election year, Secretary of State Tobias Read is taking what he says is the overdue step of cleaning up the state’s voter rolls. That process could lead to the cancellation of as many as 800,000 registrations … Oregon currently has 3,063,747 registered, active voters. About 800,000 more voters’ registration status is inactive because their mail, including ballots or official notices, from county elections offices has been returned undelivered.

Jan 6: “DOJ sues Arizona, Connecticut for refusing to hand over voter rolls”

The Justice Department has sued Arizona and Connecticut for refusing to hand over their full voter registration lists, making them the 22nd and 23rd states to be targeted by the Trump administration in its litigious campaign over voter data ahead of the midterm elections.

The lawsuits were filed Tuesday, with Attorney General Pam Bondi arguing she is charged by Congress to ensure that states have proper and effective voter registration and voter list maintenance programs.

She also threatened that she has the Civil Rights Act of 1960 to demand the statewide voter registration lists.

“Accurate voter rolls are the foundation of election integrity, and any state that fails to meet this basic obligation of transparency can expect to see us in court,” she said in a statement.

The Justice Department has sent demands for the voter registration rolls to at least 40 states and the District of Columbia, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Learn more at Election Integrity Project California

“Here’s the deal: when conservatives lose elections, they change their strategy. When liberals lose elections, they want to change the rules.”
Dan Bongino, U.S. conservative leader, radio host, law enforcement officer, and former FBI deputy director

Will SCOTUS protect girls’ sports in California?

Wednesday, January 14, 2026, 12:07 pm | Randy Thomasson

Um, a dude in a sports bra and make-up is NOT female.

Because there are only two sexes: If you’ve inherited a Y chromosome from your father, you’re male; if not, you’re female. The laws of Nature and Nature’s God cannot be altered.

FAST FACTS:

  • The SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) hearing on Jan. 13 was on whether to strike down state laws in Idaho and West Virginia that prohibit biological males from invading women’s and girls’ school sports teams.
  • After nearly three-and-a-half hours of arguments, reasonable court observers predict the Republican states’ pro-family laws will not be deemed unconstitutional and will therefore survive.
  • In July 2025, the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a California federal lawsuit alleging the State of California is violating Title IX by engaging “in illegal sex discrimination against female student athletes by allowing males to compete against them.”
  • Title IX is a U.S. federal civil rights law passed in 1972 that prohibits sex discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal funding. When passed, it aimed to ensure equal opportunities for women and girls in educational settings.
  • In September 2025, three high school girls in Southern California, represented by Advocates for Faith & Freedom, filed a new federal lawsuit — in the same Central California federal court district that the DOJ filed its lawsuit — to protect the girls’ rights under Title IX and the U.S. Constitution.
  • The California cases challenging California’s AB 1266 could reach the nation’s high court as soon as 2027; however, they must first be heard in federal district court and federal appeals court.
  • AB 1266 (signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2013) requires all K-12 public schools to permit biological boys in girls’ restrooms, showers, clubs, and sports teams; and biological girls in boys’ restrooms, showers, clubs, and sports teams. The “right” to violate these sexual boundaries is solely a self-declaration of a different “gender identity.”

Bottom line, the right lawsuits challenging AB 1266 are in place, but the wait for a SCOTUS hearing could be one to two years from now.

In the meantime, for real protection of girls, there’s a sure way to safeguard your children and grandchildren from sexual indoctrination in the government schools. See our special website for parents, RescueYourChild.com.

“We have a sitting Supreme Court justice who won’t say what a woman is because they’re not a biologist, which is so silly, because you don’t have to be a biologist to know what a woman is. I’m not a vet, but I know what a dog is.”
Riley Gaines, former college athlete and biological girls advocate, in 2023