New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has signed a bill that places
new demands on crisis pregnancy centers, despite two recent federal
rulings that called its constitutionality into question.
Mayor
Bloomberg said on March 16 that he was signing “Introduction 0-371A”
into law with a “clear conscience,” and that those who objected to the
law were free to challenge it in court.
At least one organization,
Expectant Mother Care, is already working with the American Center for
Law and Justice to file suit in federal court on March 20, disputing the
law.
“The Mayor himself admitted the law may be
unconstitutional,” observed attorney Tiffany Barrans of the American
Center for Law and Justice.
She said it was “a shame” that Mayor
Bloomberg had “chosen to subject the taxpayers of New York to a lawsuit,
rather than postpone the signing to determine if the legislation is
actually legal and constitutional.”
The measure requires crisis
pregnancy counseling centers to make a series of 10 different
disclosures in English and Spanish, in their advertizing, literature and
interactions with clients.
The centers will be required to indicate
whether they provide abortion and contraception or makes referrals for
those services, and whether or not there is a licensed medical provider
on site.
On March 15, a federal judge struck down portions of a
similar ordinance in Montgomery County, Maryland.
Judge Deborah Chasanow
issued a temporary injunction preventing the county from enforcing
rules that required crisis pregnancy centers to post a number of
disclosures.
“In several cases spanning almost 70 years, the
Supreme Court has found violations of the First Amendment where private
individuals are forced to propound government-dictated messages,” Judge
Chasanow noted.
Quoting a 1994 case regarding television
broadcasting, she wrote that such cases “reflect a concern that, in
compelling speech, 'the government seeks not to advance a legitimate
regulatory goal, but to suppress unpopular ideas or information, or
manipulate the public debate through coercion rather than persuasion.'”
On
Jan. 28, 2011, U.S. District Court Judge Marvin Garbis threw out a
similar Baltimore city ordinance that required what he described as
“compelled speech” on the part of pregnancy centers.
“Whether a
provider of pregnancy-related services is 'pro-life' or 'pro-choice,' it
is for the provider—not the government—to decide when and how to
discuss abortion and birth-control methods,” he wrote.
“The Government
cannot, consistent with the First Amendment, require a 'pro-life'
pregnancy-related service center to post a sign.”
New York
Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan, who spoke out against New York City's new
law as it neared passage in the City Council, told CNA in a March 12
interview that the City Council's actions revealed the true attitude of
many abortion advocates who say they want the procedure to be “safe,
legal, and rare.”
“Our city council began to intrude into the
beautiful services provided by our crisis pregnancy centers,” Archbishop
Dolan pointed out.
“If they were really sincere in saying, 'We
want to make abortion rare,' they would have said: 'We'll leave those
alone,'” he reasoned. “But they won't.”
Dr. Alveda King, a
pro-life advocate who is the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said
that abortion providers would not appreciate being forced to make
disclosures similar to those being asked of crisis pregnancy centers.
“We
help women, and we help babies,” she told CNA. “Why don't the abortion
clinics put up signs, saying 'We kill babies, we often hurt mothers, and
our clinics are unregulated and often not up to good standards'? Why
don't they put up those signs?”