National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Description: California’s Reproductive FACT Act, AB 775, forced pro-life pregnancy care centers to provide free advertising for the abortion industry. The law required licensed medical centers that offer free, pro-life help to pregnant women to post a disclosure saying that California provides free or low-cost abortion and contraception services. The disclosure had to include a phone number for a county office that refers women to Planned Parenthood and other abortionists. The law also forced unlicensed pregnancy centers to add large disclosures about their non-medical status in all advertisements, even if they provide no medical services.
President Trump honors one-year anniversary of NIFLA v. Becerra decision
Wednesday, Jun 26, 2019
The following quote may be attributed to Alliance Defending Freedom President, CEO, and General Counsel Michael Farris regarding the one-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, which President Trump commemorated as part of a speech Wednesday in Washington, D.C.:
“The government has no business forcing anyone to express a message that violates their convictions. California disregarded that truth when it passed a law forcing pro-life pregnancy centers to advertise for the abortion industry, but one year ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court rightly stopped that law and found that ‘the people lose when the government is the one deciding which ideas should prevail.’ The court’s decision has already been helpful to pro-life and speech cases in other states. The larger outcome of this case, however, affirmed the freedom that all Americans have to speak—or not to speak—in accordance with their conscience. We thank President Trump for recognizing the anniversary of this vital ruling from the high court.”
Farris argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of NIFLA and two of its pro-life pregnancy centers.
The following quote may be attributed to NIFLA President Thomas Glessner:
“One year ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the free speech rights of pro-life pregnancy centers and all Americans. In addition to protecting the work of life-affirming pregnancy centers across the nation, NIFLA v. Becerra clarified protection for the free speech rights of medical professionals, Christian counselors, and churches. However, we have seen that abortion industry advocates and their allies will stop at nothing to advance their agenda. Pregnancy centers working to provide free resources to women and children are still the target of legislative and media attacks nationwide. While NIFLA remains grateful for our victory in the Supreme Court one year ago, we know there is still much work to be done.”
Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith.
“The government has no business forcing anyone to express a message that violates their convictions. California disregarded that truth when it passed a law forcing pro-life pregnancy centers to advertise for the abortion industry, but one year ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court rightly stopped that law and found that ‘the people lose when the government is the one deciding which ideas should prevail.’ The court’s decision has already been helpful to pro-life and speech cases in other states. The larger outcome of this case, however, affirmed the freedom that all Americans have to speak—or not to speak—in accordance with their conscience. We thank President Trump for recognizing the anniversary of this vital ruling from the high court.”
Farris argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of NIFLA and two of its pro-life pregnancy centers.
The following quote may be attributed to NIFLA President Thomas Glessner:
“One year ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the free speech rights of pro-life pregnancy centers and all Americans. In addition to protecting the work of life-affirming pregnancy centers across the nation, NIFLA v. Becerra clarified protection for the free speech rights of medical professionals, Christian counselors, and churches. However, we have seen that abortion industry advocates and their allies will stop at nothing to advance their agenda. Pregnancy centers working to provide free resources to women and children are still the target of legislative and media attacks nationwide. While NIFLA remains grateful for our victory in the Supreme Court one year ago, we know there is still much work to be done.”
Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith.
# # # | Ref. 52123
Photos
Commentary
Previous News Releases
Permanent end to Calif. law that forced pro-life centers to advertise for abortion
Friday, Oct 26, 2018
Panel discussion: Landmark cases and Supreme Court preview
Monday, Sep 10, 2018
US Supreme Court: Govt can't force Americans to express messages they disagree with
Tuesday, Jun 26, 2018
US Supreme Court: Govt can't force people to express messages they disagree with
Tuesday, Jun 26, 2018
Michael Farris's remarks following Supreme Court oral arguments in NIFLA v. Becerra
Tuesday, May 4, 2021
ADF to take stand for free speech at US Supreme Court Tuesday
Monday, Mar 19, 2018
House honors selfless work of pregnancy centers for women, their babies
Wednesday, Mar 14, 2018
ADF responds to California: Govt shouldn't force pro-life centers to advertise for abortion
Wednesday, Mar 14, 2018
California, coerced speech, and the Court: A panel discussion on NIFLA v. Becerra
Tuesday, May 4, 2021
California AG defends forcing pro-life centers to advertise for abortion
Wednesday, Feb 21, 2018
Broad support against forcing pro-life centers to advertise for abortion
Wednesday, Jan 17, 2018
Wedding cakes, DACA, and a travel ban: A Supreme Court preview panel
Thursday, Sep 14, 2017
Legal Documents
Permanent injunction order: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
9th Circuit order on remand: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
U.S. Supreme Court opinion: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
U.S. Supreme Court oral argument audio and transcript: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Reply brief for petitioners: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
State of California merits brief: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Amicus briefs filed with U.S. Supreme Court: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Opening brief filed with U.S. Supreme Court: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Reply in support of petition for writ of certiorari: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Brief for the state respondents in opposition to petition for writ of certiorari: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris
9th Circuit opinion on preliminary injunction motion: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris
Preliminary injunction denial: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris
Opening brief filed with 9th Circuit: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris
Reply brief in support of motion for preliminary injunction: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris
Motion for and brief in support of preliminary injunction: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris
Complaint: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Harris