US

Abortion Advocates Use SCOTUS Free Speech Case To Push Fake Clinic Narrative

Shutterstock/ibreakstock

Daily Caller News Foundation logo
Grace Carr Reporter
Font Size:

Pro-abortion groups are using a free speech case regarding pregnancy centers to push the narrative that pro-life organizations have been running fake abortion clinics in order to discourage and prevent women seeking abortions from doing so.

Pro-lifers have been creating fake abortion clinics that “lie to, shame and intentionally mislead women about their reproductive-health-care options to block them from accessing abortion care,” NARAL Pro-Choice America claims. “A woman facing an unintended pregnancy deserves medically accurate, comprehensive and unbiased information,” the pro-choice group wrote on its website, alleging that anti-abortion proponents have been intentionally running fake abortion clinics in order to deceive women.

The pro-abortion group alleges there are 28 states housing fake abortion clinics, but does not describe its methods by which it concludes this number.

The accusations coincide with the U.S. Supreme Court’s hearing of oral arguments Tuesday regarding “NIFLA v. Becerra,” a case that will determine whether the government can compel certain kinds of speech. The case comes after California passed the Reproductive Fact Act in 2015, which mandates that licensed clinics providing ultrasounds, pregnancy tests and other services must also provide information about abortion.

A slew of crisis pregnancy centers sued in response, charging that being forced to advertise abortions violates their free speech rights. These are the pregnancy centers that NARAL and other pro-abortion groups allege are advertising themselves as abortion clinics in order to deceive women who are seeking abortions. (RELATED: Pro-Lifers Compare SCOTUS Pregnancy Clinic Case To Vegetarians Being Forced To Embrace Meat)

A grey area exists, however, around the limits of speech regulation by states. States can compel doctors to provide information regarding the risks of certain procedures and make sure patients are aware of all their options. Arizona lawmakers, for example, approved a bill in late February mandating abortion providers and physicians request information from women undergoing abortions about their reasons to abort and provide them with comprehensive information about the risks of abortion. Other states compel doctors to inform women seeking to abort that they can view the heartbeat and ultrasound of their unborn child if they wish to do so.

Pro-lifers worry that California’s law represents a slippery slope that, pending the Supreme Court’s ruling, could easily result in the infringement upon the free speech rights of other groups. “If the government can successfully force pro-life pregnancy centers to promote abortion, which organizations will be targeted next?” National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) Vice President of Legal Affairs Anne O’Connor asked, according to a Tuesday press release.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the case shortly after oral arguments desist.

Follow Grace on Twitter.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.