Pregnancy Centers & Practical Help

California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued Heartbeat International and RealOptions pregnancy centers for promoting abortion pill reversal, seeking over $20 million in penalties and a court order to ban claims that the treatment is safe and effective. During the six-week trial, the state's lead expert witness could not definitively say that abortion pill reversal is ineffective or unsafe, and no evidence of harm from the treatment was presented, while defense witnesses testified to successful outcomes and thousands of lives saved.

Thomas More Society announces closing arguments in California’s case against Heartbeat International and RealOptions over abortion-pill-reversal communications. The release summarizes the defense’s arguments about commercial speech, evidence of harm, and constitutional protection without reporting a final court ruling.

White explains the remaining briefing, closing-argument, and decision stages after testimony ended in California's case against Heartbeat International and RealOptions. She argues that the outcome could affect pregnancy centers' ability to discuss abortion-pill reversal nationwide and asks supporters to remain engaged and prayerful.

Wallenmeyer outlines California's advertising lawsuit against Heartbeat International and RealOptions and explains the organizations' free-speech defense. She challenges the state's interpretation of abortion-pill-reversal research and trial testimony, arguing that women should retain access to information about continuing a pregnancy.

The U.S. Supreme Court is now considering First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin, a case that could dramatically strengthen constitutional protections for pro-life pregnancy centers nationwide. California Family Council (CFC) and our allies have warned for years that abortion-friendly officials may weaponize regulatory tools to intimidate ministries offering life-affirming help to women. This case […] The post Pregnancy Centers Back at SCOTUS: New Case Could Protect PRCs Nationwide first appeared on California Family Council .

For decades, Big Abortion and extremist politicians have attacked pregnancy centers in futile attempts to chill their life-affirming work. These efforts culminated in the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, which struck down a California law that forced pregnancy centers to engage in objectionable speech. The court ruled that this violated the First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Continue Reading at The Daily Caller >> The post Pregnancy Centers And Life-Affirming Care Vs Political Harassment appeared first on Lozier Institute