Politics & Policy

Turning Pro-Life Centers into Abortion-Referral Agencies

(Dreamstime image: Nikolai Lenets)
A California law clearly violates First Amendment protections of free speech and religious liberty.

On October 14, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a California statute that forces pro-life pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) to recommend abortions. The ruling allowed the state to enforce this unjust law.

This case is the latest in a decades-long battle between pro-life pregnancy-resource centers — which offer pro-life support and options to mothers in crisis pregnancies — and the taxpayer-funded abortion industry. Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) have long fought to prevent PRCs from informing women of the risks of abortion and the value of the child they carry.

Nowhere is this battle clearer than in California. The “Reproductive FACT Act” aims to turn pro-life pregnancy centers into abortion-referral agencies by requiring the pro-life centers to give patients information on how they can obtain state-funded abortions. Non-compliance will result in fines and sanctions that will guarantee the closure of pro-life agencies.

This law clearly violates both the protections of free speech and the exercise of religious liberty contained in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. For the government to compel faith-based ministries to give voice to a message with which they disagree and that their religious convictions oppose constitutes tyranny in its highest form.

There are nearly 3,000 pro-life centers nationwide, outnumbering Planned Parenthood locations almost five to one. I am the president of the National Institute of Life and Family Advocates (NIFLA), an umbrella group that gives legal and medical assistance to more than 1,350 of these life-affirming centers, including 125 in California.

Pro-life pregnancy-resource centers have existed since the 1970s, offering material assistance, guidance, and counsel to mothers who are contemplating abortion. These centers are primarily staffed by volunteers — people motivated not by money but by love and concern for others in dire straits. All services are free of charge. No medical insurance is needed, and no government funds are used to pay for services.

Today the work of these life-affirming agencies includes the provision of necessary medical services such as ultrasound confirmation of pregnancy, STI testing and treatment, and adoption-referral services. Medical services are offered under the direction and supervision of licensed physicians and trained medical professionals, such as nurses and sonographers.

NIFLA and the pregnancy-resource centers we represent are a threat to the abortion industry’s billion-dollar bottom line. Perhaps this is why Planned Parenthood’s allies in Maryland, Texas, Oregon, New York, Virginia, and Washington have targeted pro-life alternatives for unconstitutional harassment.

These attempts have, for the most part, failed. Federal courts have declared that the measures are violations of free speech. Only in California has a measure been upheld, and a new law was recently signed in Illinois — which NIFLA is also challenging. These new challenges are why we are hosting our National Legal and Medical Summit later this week to help our members navigate this menacing legal landscape.

To date, only the city of Los Angeles has attempted to enforce the law. Other jurisdictions in California are withholding enforcement until the issues are determined in federal court.

Since 1973, more than 60 million abortions have occurred in America. This number would be far greater if not for the work of pro-life pregnancy resource centers.

Since 1973, more than 60 million abortions have occurred in America. This number would be far greater if not for the work of pro-life pregnancy resource centers.

Women deserve to have alternatives to abortion. However, if the abortion industry and its allies in government win these lawsuits, the very existence of pro-life pregnancy-resource centers will be threatened.

Most Popular

Film & TV

Knives Out Takes On the Anti-Immigration Crowd

Since the beginning of the Obama era, the Left has broadcast two contradictory messages on the subjects of race and immigration. The first is that a so-called Coalition of the Ascendant will inevitably displace white Americans as the dominant force in the country’s politics and culture. The second is that ... Read More
Film & TV

Knives Out Takes On the Anti-Immigration Crowd

Since the beginning of the Obama era, the Left has broadcast two contradictory messages on the subjects of race and immigration. The first is that a so-called Coalition of the Ascendant will inevitably displace white Americans as the dominant force in the country’s politics and culture. The second is that ... Read More
From left: Harvard University's Noah Feldman, Stanford University's Pamela Karlan, University of North Carolina's Michael Gerhardt, and George Washington University's Jonathan Turley testify before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, December 4, 2019.

The Impeachment Eye Test

To put it mildly, the 1960s were not notorious for juridical modesty. They might compare favorably, though, to Wednesday’s episode of “The Lawyer Left Does Impeachment” at the House Judiciary Committee. Oh, I have no doubt that the three progressive constitutional scholars spotlighted by Democrats yearn in ... Read More
From left: Harvard University's Noah Feldman, Stanford University's Pamela Karlan, University of North Carolina's Michael Gerhardt, and George Washington University's Jonathan Turley testify before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, December 4, 2019.

The Impeachment Eye Test

To put it mildly, the 1960s were not notorious for juridical modesty. They might compare favorably, though, to Wednesday’s episode of “The Lawyer Left Does Impeachment” at the House Judiciary Committee. Oh, I have no doubt that the three progressive constitutional scholars spotlighted by Democrats yearn in ... Read More
Culture

The Absurd Crusade against the Salvation Army

We all know some individuals who are so obviously good and kind that we are certain if anyone were to dislike them, that's all we would need to know about the person. We would immediately assume he or she is a bad person. To hate the manifestly good is a sure sign of being bad. Such is the case regarding the ... Read More
Culture

The Absurd Crusade against the Salvation Army

We all know some individuals who are so obviously good and kind that we are certain if anyone were to dislike them, that's all we would need to know about the person. We would immediately assume he or she is a bad person. To hate the manifestly good is a sure sign of being bad. Such is the case regarding the ... Read More
White House

Nancy Pelosi’s Case

Further to the post below, a couple of thoughts on Nancy Pelosi’s statement yesterday. She said this near the beginning: During the constitutional convention, James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers which might prove fatal to the ... Read More
White House

Nancy Pelosi’s Case

Further to the post below, a couple of thoughts on Nancy Pelosi’s statement yesterday. She said this near the beginning: During the constitutional convention, James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers which might prove fatal to the ... Read More
Elections

More Bad News for Medicare for All

The hits keep coming for Medicare for All. Gallup’s annual health-care survey of adults found that Americans back a system based on private insurance rather than government provision by 54 percent to 42 percent. “This could create a challenge in a general election campaign for a Democratic presidential ... Read More
Elections

More Bad News for Medicare for All

The hits keep coming for Medicare for All. Gallup’s annual health-care survey of adults found that Americans back a system based on private insurance rather than government provision by 54 percent to 42 percent. “This could create a challenge in a general election campaign for a Democratic presidential ... Read More