data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/620df/620df5299fce60fa178335a21381efd14f09c642" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6cd02/6cd024c5770b84f473c922a446312661878a2f5a" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6f600/6f60074dccac2ade2f82e0ad993667e6b3e3281a" alt=""
Is this a sign of good things to come? For the Colson Center, I’m John Stonestreet with The Point.
I told you back in November about an important case headed to the Supreme Court: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra.
At issue is the constitutionality of the California law forcing pro-life pregnancy care centers to advertise nearby abortion services. Federal judges in Maryland and elsewhere have struck down similar laws, and now that Maryland case—actually a Baltimore City ordinance—is back in the news.
A federal appeals court has rejected the city’s appeal to uphold that ordinance that would force pregnancy centers to refer for abortions and post government messages about abortion.
When will pro-abortion legislators learn? Mark Rienzi, senior counsel at Becket Legal, said the decision “confirms that government has no place mandating speech—especially speech associated with deeply-held religious beliefs.”
But don’t think yet another loss will deter pro-abortion forces from tying up pregnancy centers in court. Let’s pray the Supreme Court puts an end to this unconstitutional nonsense.
Have a Follow-up Question?
Want to dig deeper?
If you want to challenge yourself as many others have done, sign up below.