A federal judge has granted a temporary injunction blocking New York Attorney General Letitia James from taking legal action against pro-life pregnancy centers that promote the use of progesterone to reverse the effects of the abortion pill. The decision is a victory for the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), Gianna’s House, and Options Care Center, who filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the attorney general, arguing that her actions were an attempt to censor their free speech rights.
U.S. District Judge John Sinatra ruled that the pregnancy centers are likely to succeed in their claims and emphasized that the First Amendment protects their right to provide truthful information about abortion pill reversal (APR). "Absent an injunction, Plaintiffs are harmed each day they are forced to give up their Constitutional right to speak freely," said Judge Sinatra. Citing George Orwell’s 1984 in his decision, Judge Sinatra added, “More to the point—our constitution and constitutional tradition stand ‘against the idea that we need Oceania's Ministry of Truth.’ In fact, if an ‘interest in truthful discourse alone [were] sufficient to sustain a ban on speech, absent any evidence that the speech was used to gain a material advantage, it would give government a broad censorial power unprecedented.’”
Tweet This: "Our constitution and constitutional tradition stand ‘against the idea that we need Oceania's Ministry of Truth." U.S. District Judge John Sinatra
The case centers on the use of progesterone to potentially reverse the effects of the abortion pill for women who change their minds after taking the first dose in a chemical abortion regimen. Progesterone is a naturally occurring hormone that has been used for decades to sustain pregnancies and prevent miscarriages. Pro-life advocates argue that the hormone has saved thousands of unborn lives through APR, a protocol that involves administering progesterone after the first abortion pill has been taken. Success rates for APR range from 64-68%, according to multiple studies.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which represents the plaintiffs, has long argued that the government’s attempts to silence pregnancy centers stem from ideological differences rather than legitimate public health concerns. “Women in New York have literally saved their babies from an in-progress chemical drug abortion because they had access to information through their local pregnancy centers about using safe and effective progesterone for abortion pill reversal,” said ADF Senior Counsel Caleb Dalton. “But the attorney general tried to deny women the opportunity to even hear about this life-saving option.”
[Click here to subscribe to Pregnancy Help News!]
This lawsuit comes on the heels of other high-profile cases involving pregnancy centers and the promotion of APR. Earlier this year, Attorney General James launched a civil enforcement action against Heartbeat International and 11 of its affiliated faith-based pregnancy centers in New York, accusing them of spreading “false and misleading” information about APR.
Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International, weighed in on the decision. “This ruling protects women seeking to change their mind about an abortion they no longer want. In protecting free speech, Judge Sinatra protected the freedom to choose life."
Tweet This: “This ruling protects women seeking to change their mind about an abortion they no longer want. In protecting free speech, Judge Sinatra protected the freedom to choose life." @HeartbeatIntl president, Jor-El Godsey
Heartbeat International, which manages the Abortion Pill Rescue Network (APRN), has been at the forefront of providing access to APR through a nationwide network of more than 1,400 medical professionals. Despite the attorney general’s claims, the protocol remains in demand, with the APRN reportedly handling over 150 mission-critical calls per month from women seeking to reverse their abortions.
"@NIFLA, Gianna's House, and Options Care Center are suing @NewYorkStateAG @TishJames for abusing her authority by censoring #prolife pregnancy centers because they tell women about the option of using progesterone for abortion pill reversal." #Lawfarehttps://t.co/sSAw0BDnb1
— New York Families Action (@NYFamilyAction) August 22, 2024
The legal landscape surrounding APR has been contentious in several states, including California. In 2018, a similar case in NIFLA v. Becerra reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of pro-life pregnancy centers in California, finding that the state’s mandate requiring centers to promote state-sponsored abortion services violated their free speech rights. The current case in New York is part of a broader trend where government officials attempt to suppress pro-life messages under the guise of regulating public health, leading to legal battles over free speech and access to information.
Judge Sinatra’s decision is a significant moment in this ongoing conflict, ensuring that, for now, pregnancy centers in New York can continue offering women the choice to reconsider an abortion. As the case proceeds, the ruling underscores the critical role of the First Amendment in protecting the free exchange of information, particularly when lives are at stake.
This victory not only protects pro-life pregnancy centers in New York but also sets a precedent for similar cases across the country, reinforcing the idea that even in contentious issues like abortion, free speech must remain safeguarded.
Editor's Note: Heartbeat International manages Pregnancy Help News and the Abortion Pill Rescue Network. Heartbeat and the 11 pregnancy help organizations sued the NY attorney general April 30 in response to the AG's threat to sue them and prior to her filing her May 6 suit.
