Federal court strikes down Illinois law restricting pro-life pregnancy center speech

By Kurt Jensen

(OSV News) -- A federal court has struck down an Illinois law that restricted what the state's 100 pregnancy resource centers -- but not abortion clinics -- could tell patients.

Judge Iain D. Johnston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division, issued a permanent injunction against the Deceptive Practices of Limited Services Pregnancy Centers Act (SB 1909) in response to a lawsuit filed by the Chicago-based Thomas More Society, a public-interest law firm.

Under the Dec. 11 injunction, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul has agreed not to enforce the law, which declared both advertising and counseling by the centers, including sidewalk counseling, to be a "deceptive business practice." Violation would have imposed fines of up to $50,000.

Pregnancy resource centers do not perform abortions, refer women to abortions or provide abortion-inducing drugs, and their counseling discusses possible after-effects of the procedure.

The Thomas More Society filed its lawsuit July 27, the same day Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed the law. Johnston issued a temporary injunction Aug. 3.

In that injunction, the judge called the law "both stupid and very likely unconstitutional. It is stupid because its own supporter admitted it was unneeded and was unsupported by evidence when challenged. It is likely unconstitutional because it is a blatant example of government taking the side of whose speech is sanctionable and whose speech is immunized -- on the very same subject, no less."

The Thomas More Society represented three Illinois pregnancy resource centers -- Rockford Family Initiative in Rockford, Relevant Pregnancy Options Center in Highland and 1st Way Life Center in Johnsburg -- as well as the Pro-Life Action League, based in Aurora, and the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, or NIFLA, which is based in Fredericksburg, Virginia.

In a statement, NIFLA's founder and president, Thomas Glessner, called the bill "an absolute weaponization of government that unfairly and unconstitutionally targeted pregnancy centers simply because they refused to refer for or perform abortions. Let this be a stern example of what awaits those who (are) attempting to pass and enforce similar laws -- look to Illinois and save taxpayer dollars for actually helping their communities instead of going after organizations that help women and their families."

Peter Breen, a former Illinois state legislator who is head of litigation for the Thomas More Society, had told OSV News prior to the decision that the law was "the most expansive restriction on pro-life speech in the country."

In a Dec. 11 statement, Breen called SB 1909 "just one of a number of illegal new laws enacted across the country that restrict pro-life speech -- we hope this permanent injunction, with full attorney's fees, serves as a warning to other states that would seek to follow Illinois and try to silence pro-life viewpoints."

The lawsuit accused Raoul's office, in drafting the law, of having "relied largely on sidewalk squabbles having nothing to do with pregnancy centers; the unsubstantiated hearsay of an abortion-advocacy organization about unknown pregnancy clinics in unknown locations; and on a Planned Parenthood lobbyist's complaint about alleged pregnancy center 'misinformation' that was ostensibly causing women to 'decide' not to have abortions."

An earlier statement from Raoul said he had "witnessed deceptive crisis pregnancy center tactics firsthand" while visiting a Planned Parenthood clinic. He said, "People who appeared as though they might work there were outside attempting to divert patients away from the health center."

But Breen, citing documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, said, "The attorney general has received zero complaints from members of the public against an Illinois pregnancy help center for alleged violations of the Deceptive Business Practices Act."

In May, the Catholic Conference of Illinois objected to the legislation, saying it was "left open to a very broad interpretation by the attorney general" and provided "no guidance for pregnancy centers on how they are to avoid violations."