LaMalfa, Harris, Applaud Supreme Court Decision to Protect Free Speech

Press Release

Congressman Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) and Congressman Andy Harris, M.D. (R-MD) issued the following statement after the Supreme Court issued a decision in the case National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) v. Becerra. The case challenged a California state law, the Reproductive FACT Act (AB 775), which requires licensed medical centers that offer free, pro-life help to pregnant women to post written advertisements promoting the availability of free or low cost abortions subsidized by the state. It also requires non-medically licensed centers to note, in multiple languages, that they do not have a medical provider on staff. The Court ruled 5-4 to reverse both requirements.

LaMalfa said: "The Reproductive FACT Act is an affront to our constitutionally protected freedom of speech. No person or entity can be forced to promote ideas in which they do not believe or even oppose, but that's exactly what's happening. These pro-life pregnancy centers serve the noble cause of assisting expecting mothers, yet California forces them to advertise for state-subsidized abortions. It's a perfect example of the unapologetic assault on citizens' core beliefs and conscience by California's liberal state government. I am happy the Supreme Court made the correct decision and striking down this outrageous violation of the First Amendment. I'd like to thank all of the 144 House and Senate members that signed onto my friend of the Court letter asking the Supreme Court to contemplate and overturn the so-called FACT Act."

Rep. Andy Harris, M.D. said: "The Supreme Court's decision in the NIFLA v. Becerra case is great news for the American people. The government cannot force individuals or private entities to say things they do not believe. California's pro-life pregnancy centers are helping local communities by providing crucial services and supplies at no cost to expectant mothers. The State of California's shameful attempt to compel these centers to advertise abortion services was a gross violation of the First Amendment, and I applaud the Supreme Court's protection of free speech."

In January, Congressmen LaMalfa and Harris led 144 members of the House and Senate in submitting an amicus brief to the Supreme Court for this case, attached.

Background on NIFLA v. Becerra:

The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed suit against the state of California on behalf of three plaintiffs: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), Pregnancy Care Center (PCC) and Fallbrook Pregnancy Resource Center (FPRC). The plaintiffs argue that California law AB 775, the Reproductive FACT Act, violates the free speech clause and the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. AB 775 requires medically licensed pro-life pregnancy care centers to post notices alerting clients that the state of California provides free or low cost abortions; the notice must include a phone number for a county office, which refers women to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. Non-medical pregnancy care centers are required to notify clients that they do not have a medical provider on staff, even if they provide no medical services. This notice must be written in 13 different languages, prominently displayed, and included in all advertisements.

Source