CINCINNATI, February 25, 2013, (LifeSiteNews.com) – A former Ohio congressman has appealed his lawsuit holding the Susan B. Anthony List responsible for “loss of livelihood” when voters defeated him in 2010.

Steve Driehaus, who identified himself as a “pro-life Democrat,” filed suit after the SBA List threatened to expose his support for ObamaCare by taking out billboards saying: “Shame on Steve Driehaus! Driehaus voted FOR taxpayer-funded abortion.” The billboards were never erected.

Driehaus ultimately lost his seat to a Republican in the Tea Party landslide of 2010 – something he blamed on the SBA List's “lies.” As part of the case, federal authorities seized the SBA List's computers as “evidence” last June. Democrats for Life of America supported his lawsuit.

Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Black, an Obama appointee, admitted in his seven-page ruling  that he had been wrong to let the case go forward.

On Thursday, the former congressman appealed the case to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The majority of its active judges are Republican appointees, but Ohio judges are evenly split.

SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said the court action is an attempt to legally harass the organization for telling the truth about his record.

“He's trying to beat us one legal bill at a time – draining us of valuable resources and staff time,” she said. “This isn't just about a single lawsuit - this is about a politician using the federal court system to attempt to restrict our constitutional right to free speech and to prevent us from holding elected officials accountable for the way they vote.”

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires employers to cover “contraceptives” such as Plan B and Ella, which can act as abortifacients. Under the law, insurance plans within the state health exchanges have the option of covering abortions, with enrolees being required to pay only a $1 surcharge for abortion coverage.

“It is frustrating to see this ex-Congressman once again using the court system to drain valuable resources and staff time, especially knowing that he should never have started this legal battle in the first place,” Dannenfelser said.