Supreme Court decision could pave way for more denominational pregnancy centers

The Supreme Court ruling Tuesday in favor of anti-abortion clinics in California will allow similar facilities in other states to deter women from having an abortion or getting contraception.

The court ruled 5-4 that a California law requiring clinics known as "pregnancy crisis centers" to inform women about how to receive low-cost abortions from the state violates probably the first amendment.

Supporters of the law have argued that it protects women from misleading and incomplete information offered by the centers, who say the law violates their First Amendment rights by requiring them to advertise the services that they have. Oppose for moral reasons.

The decision is a blow to similar laws in states like Florida, Hawaii, Illinois and Maryland.

"I think this will have significant implications in states that have tried to similarly repress the work and speech of pro-life pregnancy centers," said Kristen Wagoner, vice president and general counsel of the United States. Alliance Defending Freedom. before the Supreme Court. "They will be doomed like California."

Wagoner said his group, which is fighting laws in these four states, is confident that the Supreme Court's decision "will provide adequate direction to lower courts to ensure that these pregnancy centers can continue to do so." good job".

The case was asking questions about the balance between freedom of expression and patients' rights to have complete information about their medical care options.

The law applies to any facility in California that provides family planning and pregnancy-related services, such as ultrasounds and pregnancy tests. Under the law, pregnancy crisis centers that do not offer a full range of reproductive care are required to inform women that the state provides birth control or abortions inexpensive or free.

Religious centers, which encourage women to choose parenting or adoption, have stated that the law has forced them to violate their religious and moral beliefs against abortion. The Supreme Court accepted.

Justice Clarence Thomas rendered the opinion of the court, to which Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch joined.

"Governments should not be allowed to force people to express a message contrary to their deepest convictions," writes Kennedy in a concordant opinion: "Freedom of expression guarantees freedom of thought and belief. This law jeopardizes these freedoms. "

Judge Stephen Breyer filed a dissenting opinion that Judges Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined.

The court also overruled a provision of the law requiring unauthorized clinics to notify clients in writing that they do not have an authorized medical service provider and that the clinic is not an institution. authorized medical.

Anti-abortion groups applauded the Court's ruling, saying the global law unfairly targeted crisis facilities.

"Pregnancy centers exist to serve and support mothers in the courageous decision to give life to their children even in difficult circumstances," said Chuck Donovan, president of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, research branch of Susan B. Anthony List.

"The Court sent a clear message today that California's cruel mandate is unacceptably encroaching on the First Amendment freedoms of pregnancy centers – a decision that will reverberate across the country where these remarkable non-profit organizations try to accomplish their mission of love "

California Attorney General Xavier BecerraXavier BecerraColorado joins the states adopting a stricter vehicle emission standard Overnight Energy: new controversies over the difficult week for Pruitt | Trump "not happy with some things" with Pruitt | The EPA backtracks on the pesticide suspension on the EPA backpedals on the suspension of the pesticide rule following the pursuit MORE (D) and supporters of the law said that it protects women against clinics that do not provide women with factual and comprehensive information about their options and those that mislead women about the services that They provide.

"When it comes to making their health decisions, all Californian women – regardless of their economic context or postal code – deserve access to critical, unbiased information to make their own informed decisions," Becerra said. in a statement.

Leader of the minority of the house Nancy PelosiNancy Patricia of Alesandro PelosiMaxine Waters reads the list of times Trump called for violence Trump seeks supremacy over civility – to thwart Dems Waters defends remarks on the confrontation of Trump officials: "The protest is the democratic way " MORE (D-Calif.) Called the court's decision a "serious setback" in the fight to advance women's rights.

Pregnancy crisis centers have increased in recent years and now number about 2,700 in the United States, more than the number of abortion clinics.

NARAL Pro-Choice America, an abortion rights group, says the centers are "fake health centers" posing as full-service health clinics. The centers reject this characterization.

Some proponents of abortion rights fear that Tuesday's decision will lead to the opening of other centers.

"The concern is with this decision that it is a green light for more crisis pregnancy centers to open across the country and for the current ones to continue their deceptive practices," said Justine Wu, Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan and member of the board of directors. Association of Reproductive Health Professionals.

"When women enter a clinic … they assume that they are getting medically accurate information about their medical options from a licensed provider.These so-called centers do not do it."

Updated at 18:13