CA pregnancy centers ask appeals court to restore their freedom of speech

Attorneys representing several California pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) were in court last week, urging the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to stop the state from censoring the PRCs from offering information about abortion pill reversal (APR).

Key Takeaways:

• In 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta attempted to censor the state's pregnancy resource centers by prohibiting them from offering 'abortion pill reversal' information.

• Last week, attorneys representing some of the centers were in court, asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse Bonta's order.

• The attorneys argued that the order violates the First Amendment right to free speech.

The Background:

In 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued several PRCs in the state, stating that they can’t provide clients with information about ‘abortion pill reversal’ because of Bonta's misinformed belief that APR information is “misleading.”

Following Bonta's lawsuit, several PRCs in the state filed countersuits, arguing that Bonta's attempt at censorship violates the First Amendment right to free speech. A federal district court later sided with Bonta and denied a petition to halt the PRC censorship, saying that the PRCs did not have the protected right to free speech because their speech was "commercial."

The Details:

Now, both Thomas More Society (TMS) and Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), on behalf of several California PRCs, have asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene. In a hearing held on October 9, the attorneys argued that the speech was not "commercial" because the PRCs did not stand to gain anything financially from women seeking abortion pill reversal.

1st Trimester Abortion | The Abortion Pill | What Is Abortion?

“There is never an out-of-pocket payment by a woman,” Peter Breen, head of litigation of Thomas More Society, explained to the three-judge panel.

“Women deserve options, not censorship,” Breen further stated in a press release. “Countless women every year regret starting and completing a chemical abortion. The Abortion Pill Reversal protocol offers them hope, but instead of supporting their second chance at choosing life, the State of California wants to keep these mothers in the dark and force them into completing an abortion they no longer want.”

“This case is about free speech, a woman’s right to access life-saving information when it is needed most, and the government’s blatant attempts to censor viewpoints it disfavors,” he further added.

Why it Matters:

Abortion pill reversal is a process that uses high doses of progesterone to counteract the negative effects of the abortion pill drug mifepristone. A woman can undergo the protocol if she experiences regret soon after taking mifepristone. It has an effectiveness rate of 64% to 68% according to a 2018 peer-reviewed study. As of November 2024, more than 6,000 lives have reportedly been saved using the protocol.

“Abortion pill reversal is a lawful and lifesaving treatment. It occurs only after a conversation and informed consent from a licensed medical professional,” Caleb Dalton, senior counsel with ADF, told the panel of judges during the hearing. “The attorney general is attempting to censor information about that so that conversation never happens.”

Go Deeper:

Live Action News has covered many stories regarding abortion pill reversal's effectiveness, including success stories from women and families that have directly benefited from the protocol. Read more here:

Education on abortion pill reversal is empowering for women

Is ‘abortion pill reversal’ safe? Watch as one doctor explains the facts.

Baby Giselle was saved from abortion and will be celebrating her first Christmas

Without abortion pill reversal, her son may never have been born