Judge Blocks NY AG's Action Against Pregnancy Centers in Free Speech Case

In a recent development, a federal judge has temporarily restrained New York's attorney general from taking enforcement action against certain pregnancy counseling centers. The centers in question have been promoting a controversial method to reverse medication abortions, which critics argue is unproven.

U.S. District Judge John Sinatra Jr. issued a preliminary injunction against Attorney General Letitia James and her office on August 22, 2024. The order prevents James' office from pursuing legal action against two specific centers and an associated organization while their lawsuit against James is pending in federal court.

The lawsuit accuses James of unfairly targeting anti-abortion groups due to their viewpoints, particularly their promotion of the "Abortion Pill Reversal" protocol. This legal action follows a similar lawsuit filed by James' office in May 2024 against another anti-abortion group and several pregnancy counseling centers for promoting abortion medication reversals.

Medication abortion, which was approved by the FDA in 2000, is currently the most common method to end a pregnancy. It involves taking two different drugs - mifepristone and misoprostol - days apart. The World Health Organization added mifepristone to its list of essential medicines in 2005, highlighting its importance in reproductive healthcare.

James' office contends that the anti-abortion groups are advising individuals who have taken mifepristone not to take the follow-up misoprostol. Instead, they recommend repeated doses of progesterone, a hormone first isolated and characterized in 1934. The attorney general's office emphasizes that this treatment has not been approved by federal regulators, and major medical associations have cautioned that the protocol is unproven and unscientific.

Judge Sinatra, who was nominated to the court in 2019 by then-President Donald Trump, based his decision on First Amendment principles. The First Amendment, ratified in 1791, protects free speech, even when that speech contains false statements. Sinatra stated that the pregnancy counseling centers have a right to "speak freely" about the reversal protocol and claim its safety and effectiveness in consultation with a doctor.

The plaintiffs in this case include the National Institute for Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), founded in 1993, and two of its member centers - Gianna's House in Brewster and Options Care Center in Jamestown. NIFLA has member pregnancy counseling centers across the country, including 51 in New York.

James' office expressed disappointment with the decision, stating, "Abortions cannot be reversed, and any advertising that suggests otherwise is false and misleading." The office is considering its legal options.

"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."

This case highlights the ongoing tension between protecting free speech and regulating potentially misleading medical information. It's worth noting that New York legalized abortion in 1970, three years before the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.

As this legal battle unfolds, it's crucial to remember that the concept of "informed consent" in medical practice dates back to a 1914 U.S. court case, emphasizing the importance of accurate and comprehensive information in healthcare decisions.