Florida Police Let Abortionists Prohibit Prayer

After a challenge from pro-life lawyers, police in Hollywood, Florida now claim they never told Christians that the government would support attempts by the local abortion clinic to force eviction of praying pro-lifers from the public sidewalk at the clinic.

"It's not loud prayer. It's simply praying for the unborn child and for women."
-- John Hickey, Volunteer, 40 Days for Life Hollywood

For background, read Maine Sues Pastor for Preaching Too Loud on Abortion, but Court Orders Portland, Maine to Pay $56,500 for Muzzling Pro-lifer

Also read U.S. Supreme Court Rules Unanimously that Christians are Free to Speak near Abortion Clinics

Click headlines below to read previous articles:

Christians Arrested for Praying Too Loud Near Chicago Abortion Clinic

Pastor's Wife Fined for Praying Too Loud in North Dakota

California Law Forces Abortion Business on Pro-lifers

Also read Pro-lifers March on Washington, D.C. Amid Government Shutdown

And read how public schools across America muzzle pro-life students and ban pro-life student clubs.

-- From "Antiabortion Protesters Say Hollywood Police Violated Their Constitutional Rights" by Jerry Iannelli, New Times Broward-Palm Beach 2/22/16

Representatives from Hollywood, Florida's 40 Days for Life chapter say that five times over the past three years, the group has, successfully and without incident, held prayer vigils outside A Woman's Center of Hollywood, an abortion provider located on Hollywood Boulevard. During such vigils, group members pray and try to educate women about alternatives to abortion.

But on February 10, three group members claim, a Hollywood Police officer ordered them off a sidewalk, violating their constitutional rights of free speech and assembly. While they are now demanding an apology from the police department, the department claims the protesters had actually been trespassing on private property.

. . . The group provided documentation that shows it applied for a permit to assemble outside the center from February 10 to March 20.

The group says three or four people were praying outside the center for 12 hours a day, each day.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Florida police block pro-life peaceful protest at abortion clinic, Thomas More Society responds" posted at The Global Dispatch 2/19/16

Thomas More Society attorneys have sent a letter to the City of Hollywood, Florida, and the Hollywood Police Department challenging a police officer’s recent order forbidding pro-lifers from standing on a public sidewalk in front of a clinic that performs abortions, apparently at the clinic’s request. On the first day of the Spring 40 Days for Life prayer vigil outside A Woman’s Center of Hollywood abortion facility, Officer Del Castillo of the Hollywood Police Department told pro-life volunteers that they could not stand on the public sidewalk in front of the abortion clinic. Thomas More Society contends that this demand is a blatant violation of the pro-lifers’ First Amendment rights.

This is the third year that volunteers participating in the 40 Days for Life Hollywood prayer vigils have had a peaceful presence on the public property – including both the sidewalk and swale (grassy area between the street and sidewalk) – outside A Woman’s Center. However, last week, on the first day of this years’ campaign, Officer Del Castillo of the Hollywood Police Department told the pro-lifers that they could not stand on the public sidewalk because the clinic had said they did not want the pro-lifers there.  He stated that the abortion clinic has the right to determine who may and may not stand on the sidewalk in front of its building.  He implied that if this order was not obeyed, pro-lifers could be ticketed.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Thomas More Society Challenges Public Sidewalk Restriction at Abortion Clinic" posted at Christian Newswire 2/17/16

"Forbidding pro-lifers from standing on public property violates 75 years of clear Supreme Court precedent that gives broad protections to those engaging in free speech in public places," said Corrina Konczal, Thomas More Society Associate Counsel. "We are confident that, once the city and Chief of Police are made aware of this officer's unconstitutional ban, that they will reverse this order and assure our clients of their rights to publicly pray and hold signs on any sidewalk in the city."

. . . The attorneys' missive notes specifically that "Officer Del Castillo's order is a clearly unconstitutional restriction of our clients' freedom of speech in a traditional public forum – a public sidewalk." The letter requests a response from the city and police department by this Friday.

"We should not be banned from the public sidewalk just because we're pro-life," said John Hickey, a 40 Days for Life Hollywood volunteer. "We're exercising our First Amendment rights by holding a peaceful prayer vigil to help women and unborn children. Hopefully, Officer Del Castillo's supervisors will reverse his incorrect order so that our free speech will be respected for the rest of the 40 Days vigil."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Federal Judge Censors Pro-life Ads on Indiana Buses

And read Oregon Woman Fired for Being Pro-life Leader

Maine Sues Pastor: Preaching Too Loud on Abortion

Maine Attorney General Janet Mills filed a civil rights lawsuit against Lisbon Pastor Brian Ingalls for peacefully preaching a pro-life message outside a Planned Parenthood facility in Portland. Abortionists appealed to the pro-abortion Democrat AG saying that pregnant mothers inside their facility could hear the pastor's concerns about “murdering babies, aborted babies’ blood and Jesus.”

For background, read Court Orders Portland to Pay $56,500 for Muzzling Pro-lifer





-- From "Maine sues anti-abortion protester, claiming he shouts too loud" by Dave Sherwood, Reuters 11/10/15

"All patients have the right to receive medical services free of 'the cacophony of political protests,' in the words of the United States Supreme Court," Mills, a Democrat, said in a statement. "While protesters have every right to say anything they want in a public area in the vicinity of a medical facility, they are not permitted to disrupt another citizen's healthcare services."

Maine law protects the right of any person to receive "safe and effective" medical services without disruptions caused by loud noises.

According to the complaint, police warned Ingalls to keep his voice down so that he would not be heard inside, but he continued yelling anyway.

The lawsuit would prevent Ingalls, a regular protester at the clinic, from coming within 50 feet (15 m) of the facility.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Maine sues Planned Parenthood foe, says he yelled too loudly" by Patrick Whittle, Associated Press 11/11/15

Attorney General Janet Mills filed the complaint against Brian Ingalls, 26, under the state's civil rights act. Mills said he violated the rights of patients at the Portland facility on Oct. 23 when the sound of his voice directed to the second floor disrupted counseling sessions between staff and patients.

Ingalls, of Lisbon, declined to comment when reached by email. His attorney, Erin Kuenzig, said it's a "baseless lawsuit" filed to circumvent a U.S. Supreme Court ruling about protester buffer zones. . . . The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that similar buffer zones in Massachusetts violated free speech rights.

"They're trying to claim that it's some kind of safety concern that he was preaching the Bible on a public sidewalk," Kuenzig said. "Just completely meritless."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "AG accuses man of civil rights violations during Planned Parenthood protest" by Christopher Cousins, Staff, Bangor Daily News 11/10/15

The suit filed in Cumberland County Superior Court alleges that Ingalls frequently is a protester at the Portland Planned Parenthood location and on Oct. 23 “was yelling up toward the second floor of the building at 443 Congress St. about murdering babies, aborted babies’ blood and Jesus.”

Erin Kuenzig is with the Thomas More Law Center, which is representing Ingalls in this suit. She said that Mills’ suit is an attempt to rehash a prior legal battle the law center fought against Portland when the city tried and ultimately failed to implement a 39-foot buffer zone for protests around Planned Parenthood’s Congress Street location.

“The complaint that was filed was completely meritless and just an attempt to circumvent the court ruling issued in October,” Kuenzig said by phone Tuesday. “This is essentially another buffer zone. … It’s clear that Planned Parenthood doesn’t like what Mr. Ingalls is saying, and he’s simply a Christian who is preaching from the Bible.”

Kuenzig said one flaw in the complaint is that there is no guideline about how loud someone can protest.

“There’s no way to judge that,” she said. “This is just another way to try to silence pro-life advocates outside the abortion clinic.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Click headlines below to read previous articles:

Pastor's Wife Fined for Praying Too Loud in North Dakota

Christians Arrested for Praying Too Loud Near Chicago Abortion Clinic

Indiana Town Denounces Loud, Praying Christians

Missouri Police Steal Preacher's Amplifier to Shut Him Up

Pastor Arrested in California for Reading Bible in Public

Christian Jailed in Texas for Witnessing on Sidewalk

Buffalo, NY Police Boot Christian from Festival for Talking

Jesus Talk Outlawed in New Orleans, Arrests Made

Preacher Arrested: 'Breach of the Peace' on Street

Virginia Police Halt Bible 'Noise,' Preacher Sues City & Wins

Pastor Wins Free Speech Lawsuit Over California Mall

Police Say Prayer Illegal Outside U.S. Supreme Court Building

Christians Arrested for Praying at Gay Festival

Praying Mother Banned from School Grounds in New Hampshire

Pro-lifers Muzzled — Maine City Must Pay $56,500

As a result of a consent judgment approved by Judge Nancy Torresen of the U.S. District Court in Portland, Maine, the city of Portland will pay legal fees of pro-lifers who were barred from public property near the Planned Parenthood abortion clinic by an unconstitutional ordinance.

“This judgment is significant because it is a formal and binding legal recognition that the city of Portland violated the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights through its ‘buffer zone’ ordinance. There was no legitimate basis for banning the plaintiffs and other law-abiding citizens from using the public sidewalk surrounding Planned Parenthood’s abortion clinic during the company’s business hours.”
-- Erin Kuenzig, Attorney with the Thomas More Law Center in Michigan

For background, read U.S. Supreme Court Rules Unanimously that Christians are Free to Speak near Abortion Clinics

Click headlines below to read previous articles:

Government Pays $275,000 for Pro-lifers' False Arrests

Idaho University Pays $20,000 to Unmuzzle Pro-lifers

Wyoming Pays $30,000 for Censoring Pro-life Posters

Harassment of Pro-lifers Costs Illinois City $$

Ohio College Pays $9,000 for Censoring Pro-life Free Speech

-- From "Portland settles lawsuit bought by anti-abortion activists over no-protest zone ordinance" by The Associated Press 10/21/15

The city of Portland has settled a lawsuit filed by anti-abortion activists challenging an ordinance that established a 39-foot no-protest zone around a clinic providing abortions.

The suit alleged that the ordinance, responsible for creating the buffer zone around a Planned Parenthood location's entrance, violated their free speech rights. A 2014 U.S. Supreme Court ruling established that a similar no-protest zone in Massachusetts was in violation of free speech rights.

The Portland City Council repealed the ordinance in question soon after, but a judge determined that protesters could still seek damages for when the buffer zone was in effect.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Portland settles lawsuit, must pay abortion protesters’ legal fees" by Scott Dolan, Staff Writer, Portland Press Herald 10/21/15

Jessica Grondin, spokeswoman for the city of Portland, said the City Council “acted swiftly” by repealing the city ordinance at its first meeting after the Supreme Court ruled in the Massachusetts case.

An attorney for the activists – Daniel and Marguerite Fitzgerald of Shapleigh and their children and Richmond resident Leslie Sneddon – said last year, after the city repealed its buffer zone ordinance, that they wanted to continue the federal court litigation against the city to set a precedent.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "High court voids abortion clinic protest-free zone" by Mark Sherman, Associated Press 6/26/14

The Supreme Court unanimously struck down the 35-foot protest-free zone outside abortion clinics in Massachusetts Thursday [June 2014], declaring it an unconstitutional restraint on the free-speech rights of protesters.

While the court was unanimous in the overall outcome, [Chief Justice John] Roberts joined with the four liberal justices to strike down the buffer zone on narrower grounds than the other, more conservative justices wanted.

In a separate opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized Roberts’ opinion as carrying forward “this court’s practice of giving abortion-rights advocates a pass when it comes to suppressing the free-speech rights of their opponents.”

Scalia said state and local governments around the country would continue to be able to “restrict antiabortion speech without fear of rigorous constitutional review.” Joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas, Scalia dissented from the Colorado decision and said Thursday he would have overturned it.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Judge dismisses most of lawsuit over since-repealed abortion clinic buffer zone" by Seth Koenig, Bangor Daily News Staff 10/27/14

A federal judge on Monday declared most aspects of a lawsuit against the city of Portland moot, pointing out that the abortion clinic buffer zone being challenged in the lawsuit was repealed by the city months ago.

But U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Torresen stopped short of dismissing the lawsuit in its entirety, leaving alive a motion by the plaintiffs, a group of anti-abortion protesters, to seek nominal damages from the city for the period of time in which they weren’t allowed to demonstrate near the clinic on Congress Street.

City officials and Planned Parenthood representatives said the buffer zone protected the civil rights of patients to access health care services, and they accused the anti-abortion demonstrators of being intimidating and belligerent to individuals approaching the facility.

The protesters argued the buffer zone infringed upon their constitutionally protected right to free speech. The demonstrators said allegations of aggressive behavior were overblown, as evidenced by the fact that police never issued them any summonses for impeding public ways or disorderly conduct.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read how public schools across America muzzle pro-life students and ban pro-life student clubs.

Supreme Court Decision Favors Abortionists' Speech

Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously against so-called "buffer zones" that bar pro-lifers from public sidewalks near abortion clinics, Justice Scalia and three other justices said that the majority opinion discriminates against pro-lifers by ruling extra speech rights for abortionist employees.

“Today’s opinion carries forward this court’s practice of giving abortion-rights advocates a pass when it comes to suppressing the free-speech rights of their opponents. There is an entirely separate, abridged edition of the First Amendment applicable to speech against abortion. . . . [and the majority opinion] continues the onward march of abortion-speech-only jurisprudence”
-- Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas

For background, read Supreme Court: Do Pro-lifers Have Free Speech in Massachusetts?

Also read 9th Circuit rules that buffer zones must be equally enforced against abortion clinic advocates.

In separate cases, harassment of pro-lifers costs money in Wyoming and Rockford, IL.

-- From "Court strikes down abortion clinic buffer zones" by Robert Barnes, The Washington Post 6/27/14

Significantly, only the court’s liberals joined [Chief Justice John] Roberts’ [majority] opinion — Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. That is a rare combination at the court . . .

The court’s four conservatives agreed the law violated the First Amendment but, writing separately from Roberts, said he was wrong in not simply finding that the law discriminated against those opposed to abortion.

Justice Samuel Alito did not join Scalia’s biting opinion and wrote his own, agreeing that the law was unconstitutional because employs “blatant viewpoint discrimination.”

Roberts’ opinion — which Scalia mocked as “Something for Everyone” — found a middle ground.

The Massachusetts case is McCullen v. Coakley.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Scalia Accuses Fellow Justices Of Discriminating Against Pro-Lifers" by Tristyn Bloom, Daily Caller 6/27/14

The law’s opponents argued that the law was what is known as a “content-based” restriction of speech because “it creates speech exclusion zones only at abortion clinics and, as a practical matter, affects speech on only one controversial issue–abortion.” Because the law exempted clinic employees and volunteers from the buffer zone, they also argued that it privileged abortion supporters.

This isn’t the first time Scalia has spoken out against his fellow justices on this issue. In 2000, Scalia dissented from a majority ruling in favor of a Colorado buffer zone law: “What is before us, after all, is a speech regulation directed against the opponents of abortion, and it therefore enjoys the benefit of the ‘ad hoc nullification machine’ that the Court has set in motion to push aside whatever doctrines of constitutional law stand in the way of that highly favored practice.”

“Having deprived abortion opponents of the political right to persuade the electorate that abortion should be restricted by law, the Court today continues and expands its assault upon their individual right to persuade women contemplating abortion that what they are doing is wrong. Because, like the rest of our abortion jurisprudence, today’s decision is in stark contradiction of the constitutional principles we apply in all other contexts, I dissent.”

It is unclear whether the court’s Thursday ruling will overturn the 2000 decision.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Scalia: Supreme Court is letting liberal politicians crush pro-life free speech" by Ben Johnson, LifeSiteNews.com 6/26/14

The law, [Scalia] said, clearly intended to silence all pro-life advocacy near abortion facilities.

The three criticized the majority's view that the state law was not “narrowly tailored” because the pro-life counselors had not engaged in sufficient violence to warrant the statute. “That is rather like invoking the eight missed human targets of a shooter who has killed one victim to prove, not that he is guilty of attempted mass murder, but that he has bad aim.”

Justice Scalia also rapped the court's liberal wing for telling Massachusetts lawmakers to “consider an ordinance such as the one adopted in New York City that . . . makes it a crime ‘to follow and harass another person within 15 feet of the premises of a reproductive health care facility.’”

Justice Samuel Alito had questioned why abortion escort's free speech rights would be respected within the bubble zone but pro-lifers would have their rights denied.

Imagine if two people spoke to a woman considering an abortion, he said during oral arguments months ago. “The first, who is an employee of the facility, says, ‘Good morning. This is a safe facility.’ The other one who’s not an employee says, ‘Good morning, this is not a safe facility.’ Now, under this statute, the first one has not committed a crime; the second one has committed a crime,” he said.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "JUSTICE SCALIA, with whom JUSTICE KENNEDY and JUSTICE THOMAS join, concurring in the judgment" (beginning on page 35) posted at Supreme Court of The United States 6/26/14

The second half of the Court’s analysis today, invalidating the law at issue because of inadequate “tailoring,” is certainly attractive to those of us who oppose an abortion speech edition of the First Amendment. But think again. This is an opinion that has Something for Everyone, and the more significant portion continues the onward march of abortion-speech-only jurisprudence.

The gratuitous portion of today’s opinion is Part III, which concludes—in seven pages of the purest dicta—that subsection (b) of the Massachusetts Reproductive Health Care Facilities Act is not specifically directed at speech opposing (or even concerning) abortion and hence need not meet the strict-scrutiny standard applicable to content based speech regulations. Inasmuch as Part IV holds that the Act is unconstitutional because it does not survive the lesser level of scrutiny associated with content-neutral “time, place, and manner” regulations, there is no principled reason for the majority to decide whether the statute is subject to strict scrutiny.

Is it harassment, one wonders, for Eleanor McCullen [a pro-life sidewalk counselor] to ask a woman, quietly and politely, two times, whether she will take literature or whether she has any questions? Three times? Four times? It seems to me far from certain that First Amendment rights can be imperiled by threatening jail time (only at “reproductive health care facilit[ies],” of course) for so vague an offense as “follow[ing] and harass[ing].” It is wrong for the Court to give its approval to such legislation without benefit of briefing and argument.

Public streets and sidewalks are traditional forums for speech on matters of public concern. Therefore, as the Court acknowledges, they hold a “‘special position in terms of First Amendment protection.’” Moreover, “the public spaces outside of [abortion providing] facilities . . . ha[ve] become, by necessity and by virtue of this Court’s decisions, a forum of last resort for those who oppose abortion.” It blinks reality to say, as the majority does, that a blanket prohibition on the use of streets and sidewalks where speech on only one politically controversial topic is likely to occur—and where that speech can most effectively be communicated—is not content based. Would the Court exempt from strict scrutiny a law banning access to the streets and sidewalks surrounding the site of the Republican National Convention? Or those used annually to commemorate the 1965 Selma-to-Montgomery civil rights marches? Or those outside the Internal Revenue Service? Surely not.

To read the entire Supreme Court decision, CLICK HERE.

Also read Christians Arrested for Praying Near Chicago Abortion Clinic (violated city's "Bubble Zone" ordinance)

In addition, read Obama Administration Targets Pro-lifers for Prosecution as well as White House Targets Pro-lifers with Lawsuits, BUT more recently Judges Counter Obama's Attacks on Pro-lifers

And read IRS Tells Pro-lifers: Either Shut Up or Be Taxed

Supremes: Do Pro-lifers Have Free Speech in Mass.?

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of a 2007 Massachusetts law that bans Christians from praying or talking to people while standing on public property if there's an abortion clinic door or driveway within 35 feet.  In 2009, a federal appeals court in Boston ruled the law to be necessary in order to protect the safety of the public from such Christians.

For background, read Massachusetts Bans Pro-life Sidewalk Counseling

Also read Pro-life Win: Court Rejects Abortionists' Buffer Zone Ordinance

Government must protect the public from Christians? Yes, because Obama's Army Says Christians are the Worst Terrorists

In separate cases, harassment of Pro-lifers costs money in Wyoming and Rockford, IL.

-- From "Supreme Court will hear appeal of law creating abortion buffer zone" by The Associated Press 6/24/13

The justices on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from abortion opponents, who wanted the law thrown out. The law allows individuals to enter the buffer zone only to enter or leave the clinic or reach a destination other than the clinic.

Abortion opponents who regularly stand outside clinics in Boston, Worcester and Springfield claimed the law unfairly keeps them from engaging patients in conversations at a closer distance.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Gets U.S. High Court Review" by Greg Stohr, Bloomberg 6/24/13

Massachusetts enacted the law in 2007, strengthening an existing measure that had required a 6-foot buffer zone at abortion clinics. The new law makes it a crime to “knowingly enter or remain” in an area within 35 feet of a clinic entrance, exit or driveway. The measure exempts clinic employees and people entering or leaving the facility.

The justices will hear arguments and rule in their 2013-14 term, which starts in October.

The case is McCullen v. Coakley, 12-1168.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Supreme Court to hear abortion-related case for review" by Trisha Bee, CNN 6/24/13

The state’s “selective exclusion law” makes it a crime for speakers other than clinic “employees or agents … acting within the scope of their employment” to “enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk” within 35 feet of “a reproductive health care facility.”

Anti-abortion activists say the law has kept them from talking with patients approaching the clinic entrances. But a federal appeals court in January said “the right of the state to take reasonable steps to ensure the safe passage of persons wishing to enter health care facilities cannot seriously be questioned.”

The court had rejected a similar challenge to the law four years ago. Municipalities in Montana, Colorado, Florida, California and elsewhere have enacted similar “fixed” and “floating” buffer zone laws.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Supreme Court Will Determine if Pro-Lifers Have Free Speech at Abortion Clinics" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 6/24/13

In February, US District Judge Joseph L. Tauro rejected claims that the law, affecting abortion centers in Boston, Worcester, and Springfield, infringed on First Amendment rights. In his ruling, he said the law “as applied is a valid regulation of the time, place, and manner of Plaintiffs’ speech.”

Attorney General Martha Coakley, an abortion advocate who defended the law, was happy with the ruling. She said at the time: “We are pleased that the court has upheld the Commonwealth’s buffer zone law, which enhances public safety and access to reproductive health care facilities, while preserving freedom of expression. The court agreed that the buffer zone leaves open ample opportunities for communication and civil engagement on the public ways outside the facilities.”

Anne Fox of Massachusetts Citizens for Life previously told LifeNews, “Unfortunately, it has become common in this country for laws to apply differently when they have to do with abortion. The idea that people cannot express their views within a 35 foot radius – i.e. a circle with a 70 foot diameter – of an abortion facility is un-American. It is also ludicrous. Given the huge size of the zone, people have been approached by the police for engaging in activities on their own properties, which happen to be next door to abortion facilities. This happened recently in Worcester,” she said.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Obama Administration Targets Pro-lifers for Prosecution as well as White House Targets Pro-lifers with Lawsuits, BUT more recently Judges Counter Obama's Attacks on Pro-lifers

In addition, read IRS Tells Pro-lifers: Either Shut Up or Be Taxed

IRS Tells Pro-lifers: Either Shut Up or Be Taxed

Although America's highest courts have repeatedly confirmed the First Amendment right of "sidewalk counseling" at abortion clinics, the anti-life Internal Revenue Service denied pro-life organizations the same timely tax-exempt status given to liberal groups who perform anti-Christian brow-beating.

For background, read IRS Gave Homosexualists Private Info on Enemy Christians

And also read Some Pastors Continue Efforts to be Freed of IRS Muzzle

-- From "IRS Agent: Keep Faith to Yourself" by Todd Starnes, Foxnews.com 6/10/13

An Internal Revenue Service agent was recorded on audiotape telling a pro-life organization that they had to remain neutral on the issue of abortion and lectured the group’s president about forcing its religious beliefs on others.

In a May 2011 letter to the pro-life group, [IRS agent Sherry] Wan took issue with their prayer and evangelism efforts.

“It appears that some of your activities, conducted or plan to conduct, may be neither educational nor charitable in nature no matter how sincere of your religious belief or how important of your viewpoint,” Wan wrote.

[The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorney Erik Stanley said,] “What the IRS is doing here is unconstitutional – attempting to tell an organization that it could not advocate its viewpoint and still be considered educational and gain a tax exemption.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Excerpts from "Transcript of recording of phone call placed by IRS agent Sherry Wan to Pro-Life Revolution President Ania Joseph - March 8, 2012"  posted by ADF:

IRS - . . . you have the religious freedom; the freedom of speech. And other people also have the civil rights; human rights. You cannot, you know, use your religious belief to tell other people you don’t have a belief, so I don’t believe you need the right to do this, start confrontation, protesting, uh, prot, uh, protest. [unintelligible] You don’t apply for tax exemption.

Citizen - My religion says that, you know, we have to reach out to women who are hurting, who are considering killing their own babies.

IRS - You reach out to woman, you can’t do that. You can, you know, to educate the woman, to do, you know, you don’t do that. However, you can’t just like say, you know, the [unintelligible] woman, you fear the woman. You have to get the woman the opportunity to listen to you. You cannot force your religion or force your beliefs on somebody else.

IRS - . . . when you, you know, go to, you know, the abortion clinic, and you found them [unintelligible], we don’t want, you know, to come against them. You can’t take all kinds of confrontation activities and also put something on a web site and ask people to take action against the abortion clinic. That’s not, that’s not really educational.

Citizen - Actually, actually, a peaceful prayer vigil is not...

IRS - . . . you have to know your boundaries. You have to know your limits. . . .

Citizen - Yeah, I’m going to have to consult somebody because you know I understand your point, but I also understand as a ministry we have certain rights as well and I want to consult somebody and just take it from there and to get more information and...

IRS - . . . after you, you talk to your lawyer, or talk to your legal consultant, and if you say, OK, here we understand the position, I feel that you know, you know, we understand your position, understand your point and that we wanted to, wanted to, you know, get this kicked down quickly and we are willing to take those, no longer can do the activities, [unintelligible]. OK?

IRS - Yeah. I apologize for this because it is a holiday and everything and I’m off and on another project, so I apologize for the delay, but I think we’re talking about more time to discuss and think about your application and want to give you more time to think about this, too. . . .

To read the complete telephone transcript, and hear the audio recording, CLICK HERE.

From "IRS to pro-life group: 'You cannot force your religion'" by Patrick Howley, Investigative Reporter, Daily Caller 6/10/12

The IRS sent Pro-Life Revolution a grammatically disastrous  letter dated February 5, 2013 requesting additional information about its protesting activities.

“You called for faithful Christians to praying and counseling in front of the abortion referring clinic, conducting activities in front of another entity, which take opposite positions, appears more like a type of protest, which interferes the normal operation of a business with an effect of humiliating the persons working or receives the service there,” according to the letter, which lists Sherry Wan as the IRS agent to contact.

The IRS denied tax-exempt status to the group Coalition for Life of Iowa and forced leaders of the group, in a June 2009 phone call, to promise that they do not organize protests outside of Planned Parenthood.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "IRS Agent Who Told Group to Keep Faith Private Opposed Pro-Life Position" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 6/11/13

Alliance Defending Freedom, a pro-life legal group, made the audio available today of IRS officials telling a group that provides support to women in abusive pregnancy situations to keep its faith to itself. . . .

In February of this year, the IRS requested additional information in another letter and attempted to apply a standard for tax exemption to Pro-Life Revolution that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held to be unconstitutional in 1980. Alliance Defending Freedom pointed this out in a letter responding to the IRS, which finally granted tax-exempt status to the organization in a letter received Thursday.

Now, the lead attorney in the case has given a new interview in which he explains the IRS agent in question was ideologically opposed to the pro-life group’s mission and that the targeting came a result of that rather than the agent’s not understanding laws or IRS rules related to nonprofits.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Proved: Tea Party Movement is Christian

Harassment of Pro-lifers Costs Illinois City $$

After a five-year legal battle, the City of Rockford has agreed to pay legal fees of pro-life activists who sued the city in federal court, and agreed to amend ordinances and properly train police forces to ensure the constitutional rights of Christians' free speech and assembly.

“It is amazing the degree to which we have to go to federal court to drive home the fact that these rights exist and [that] policemen have as much a duty to enforce those rights and protect them as they do to catch robbers and so forth.”
-- Tom Brejcha, Thomas More Society (pro-lifers' legal counsel)

For background, read Rockford Abortionists Bomb Pro-life Catholics and also read Unsafe Rockford Abortion Clinic Closed by Health Dept.

-- From "Rockford, Ill. agrees to educate law enforcers about the law" by Charlie Butts, American Family News 3/7/13

Pro-life prayer warriors for years have conducted prayer vigils at an infamous Rockford abortion mill, now closed, and had continuing run-ins with police in violation of their constitutional rights. In addition, over the past few years pro-life volunteers have been assaulted, instructed to remove their motor home from the city, and drowned out with a noisy chainsaw.

“One of our pro-life sidewalk counselors there, Kevin Rilott, was told by a policeman to ‘Get out of my sight’ – he didn't like Kevin apparently,” the attorney [Tom Brejcha] observes. “And so he got out of the policeman's sight; but then the policeman said he was jaywalking and gave him the first jaywalking ticket, I think, in recent Rockford history.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Rockford Police to Take Classes on Citizens' Constitutional Rights" posted at Christian Newswire 3/1/13

"In the past the city of Rockford had refused on numerous occasions to protect pro-life demonstrators against threats as well as actual assaults by lawless persons hostile to the pro-life view," said Kevin Rilott [of Rockford Pro-Life Initiative], one of the primary plaintiffs in the federal suit. "We brought our lawsuit against the Rockford to compel our own city's law enforcement officials to protect pro-lifers as well as other citizens from against such public and private harms."

The settlement dictates a comprehensive policy reform on Rockford's part, mandates law enforcement education and training regarding citizen rights, requires payment by the city for the plaintiffs' legal fees as well as modest compensation for damages incurred when a pro-life bus bench advertisement was defaced and obliterated and future advertisements barred. Also, a spurious city complaint against Rilott for alleged "jaywalking" outside [the] now-shuttered abortion premises was dismissed.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Further background reading:  Supreme Court Rules for Pro-lifer with Fetus Photos and also read Judges Counter Obama's Attacks on Pro-lifers as well as Wyoming Pays $30000 for Censoring Pro-life Posters

Dems Vote for Abortion, Christians Pray for Life

While liberals fight for women's rights to taxpayer-funded sexual immorality and abortion, Christians campaign to save unborn lives and women's well-being in the annual 40 Days for Life prayer vigil across America.

For background, read Prayer Vigil Saves Babies & Mothers from Abortion and also read Christians Will Vote Against Abortion, Socialism as well as Obama Makes New Promise to Fund Killing Babies


-- From "For 40 days, protestors pray at Planned Parenthood" by Nathan Bergstedt, Grand Rapids, MN Herald Review 10/9/12

As part of the nationwide 40 Days for Life movement, local anti-choice activists have gathered outside Planned Parenthood in Grand Rapids. Throughout the 40 days, which last from September 26 to November 4, the prayer vigils are being conducted each Monday throughout October during business hours at the Planned Parenthood office.

According to local organizer Marlene Rowe, the main purpose of these demonstrations is to “pray to end abortion in our country.”

Around 1 p.m. on Monday, despite the dreary, drizzly weather, three protestors marched back and forth in front of the clinic’s office off of Hwy 2 on the west side of town. Holding signs that read “Abortion Kills Children” and “Jesus Forgives and Heals,” they quietly paced on the public space by the street so as to not trespass on the Planned Parenthood property. They did what they could to stay out of the way, and they are not allowed to talk to patients unless approached and asked questions.

Locally, for the second year in a row, members of numerous different churches in the greater Grand Rapids area have joined together to have a presence outside Planned Parenthood.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Campaign provides students opportunity for prayer" by Jackey Tamez, Staff Writer, Houston Baptist Collegian 10/25/12

Every Wednesday between 3 p.m. and 5 p.m., Students for Life members gather in front of a Planned Parenthood as part of the 40 Days for Life campaign offering advice and information on alternatives to abortion.

“Our goal is to encourage women to not get an abortion,” [sophomore Nicholas] Van Cleve said.

Their efforts are not futile. Van Cleve said that during the week, one woman decided to keep her baby after listening to the ultrasound.

However, Van Cleve said Planned Parenthood staff members do try to interfere with the counselor’s efforts. For example, if the sidewalk counselor has been talking to someone for over five minutes, a staff member will drive up behind the car and start to honk in order to get the car to move.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "341 babies saved from abortion" by Shawn Carney, 40 Days for Life Campaign Director, LifeSiteNews.com 10/22/12

With two weeks to go in this 40 Days for Life campaign, we are so far aware of 341 babies saved from abortion!

[Example: WILMINGTON, DELAWARE]

There was a long line waiting to get into the abortion center. As one of the young women waited, she could hear the sung prayer of the 40 Days for Life vigil participants. She said that the song stuck in her head.

When she got inside and talked with the staff, she asked for an ultrasound. Once she saw the baby, she realized she simply couldn’t go through with the abortion.

After she walked out, she spoke to vigil participants. “She said she really never wanted to see the place again,” said Julie, one of the volunteers. “I don’t blame her! Thank you to all of you for your continued presence at Planned Parenthood. A life was saved today!”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Three abortion workers quit" by Shawn Carney, 40 Days for Life Campaign Director, LifeSiteNews.com 10/26/12

[As for the 40 Days conclude] abortion center staffers … ask themselves the question, “What good do I really do here?”

During this campaign, we’ve had reports of three abortion center employees who have left their jobs — and a few others are thinking about it. In the majority of these cases, the stories will remain confidential.

When former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson experienced a conversion, quit her job and walked into my office at the Coalition for Life next door, she lost not just an income but close personal friends. These workers will experience the same. So please keep them in your prayers as they transition out of the abortion business and find hope and healing.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Planned Parenthood's Prayer Vigil for More Abortion

Judges Counter Obama's Attacks on Pro-lifers

U.S. District Judge Philip A. Brimmer dismissed President Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder's assertions of ten separate violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act against Kenneth Scott's sidewalk counseling at Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains abortion clinic in Denver.

For background, read Obama Administration Targets Pro-lifers for Prosecution and also read White House Targets Pro-lifers with Lawsuits

UPDATE 9/24/12: Federal judge blocks Obama DOJ in prosecution of David Hamilton in Louisville, KY

UPDATE 3/22/12: Obama administration gives up -- all charges dismissed against Kenneth Scott

-- From "Feds want 25-foot limit for Colo. abortion protester" by Colleen Slevin, Associated Press 1/26/12

U.S. Justice Department lawyer Gayle Winsome told U.S. District Judge Philip Brimmer on Thursday that Kenneth Scott sometimes stands in the only driveway leading to the center's to talk to drivers and distribute pamphlets, forcing drivers stopped behind them to wait before they can enter. She said that violates a 1994 law protecting access to abortion clinics and urged Brimmer to order Scott to keep at least 25 feet away from the entrance. She said he can still express his views from there without impeding traffic and without visitors having to worry about hitting Scott.

Scott's lawyers argue that Scott is a peaceful protester with a constitutional right to speak from public areas leading up to the property line of the Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains center.

Peter Breen of the Thomas More Society, one of Scott's lawyers, said the government lawsuit against Scott is an overreach under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, passed in the wake of clinic sit-ins and a 1993 shooting that wounded Kansas abortion provider George Tiller. He was shot again and killed in 2009 at his Wichita church.

The FACE act went mostly unused under George W. Bush, but the Obama administration has taken a harder line against anti-abortion activists.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Five D.C. prosecutors go after abortion protestor for passing out literature" by Jack Minor, Greeley Gazette 1/4/12

Ken Scott and his wife, Jo, have a history with Planned Parenthood. In 2008, Jo was convicted of violating the state’s bubble law after a pair of Planned Parenthood employees, pretending to be patients, recorded Jo Scott moving within eight feet of them. The bubble law creates an eight foot floating bubble around anyone within 100 feet of the entrance to an abortion facility.

While the law specifies that Scott cannot protest within 100 feet of the clinic entrance, the DOJ wants the distance expanded to include being within 25 feet of the entrance to the clinic. The Justice department has assigned five prosecutors to handle the case.

The Chicago-based Thomas More Society has recently announced it would be assisting Scott with his defense. Peter Breen, executive director and general counsel for the society, told the Gazette that the government’s case turns free speech on its head. “Scott is not being charged with violating any of the bubble law requirements.”

“When I read the complaint it made it sound as if Scott was throwing himself in front of cars. It was nothing of the sort, when you watch the video he is standing on the side of the road and if people want to come over to talk and receive literature about abortion alternatives, they are free to do so. He is in no way blocking people from entering or exiting the facility.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Judge Stops Obama Admin From Silencing Pro-Life Activist" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 1/30/12

“This is the latest in a series of meritless, harassing lawsuits filed by the Obama Administration that seek to squelch peaceful pro-life advocacy on public sidewalks outside abortion providers,” said Peter Breen, executive director and legal counsel for the Thomas More Society.

Breen added, in his statement to LifeNews today: “In this case, the Attorney General presented no evidence that Mr. Scott injured, intimidated, or did anything other than speak to folks who willingly decided to stop their cars to talk with him. Assigning five taxpayer-funded prosecutors from Washington, D.C. to attack one peaceful man exercising his free speech rights is a colossal waste of money, uncalled for at any time, much less at a time of record government deficits, not to mention the Government’s gross insult to the First Amendment.”

United States v. Scott is one of many recent FACE Act lawsuits brought by the Obama Administration and its Attorney General, Eric Holder, against local sidewalk counselors, Breen says. The Attorney General’s primary legal theory is that a car that stops to speak to a sidewalk counselor constitutes a “physical obstruction” of access to an abortion facility and a violation of the FACE Act, punishable by a $10,000 fine and an injunction against sidewalk counseling at a particular facility.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

And, in a related court case in Florida . . .

UPDATE 4/4/12: Obama's DOJ drop case and pay prolife sidewalk counselor Mary Susan Pine $120,000 in legal fees

From "Judge: White House persecuting pro-lifer" by Bob Unruh, World Net Daily 1/16/12

A federal judge says he doesn’t have enough evidence to sanction Barack Obama’s Department of Justice, but its prosecution of a Florida pro-lifer is suspiciously like persecution.

“It is rather curious that the Department of Justice was able to meet with the [Presidential Women's Center in West Palm Beach, Fla.] staff and police officers the very next day after the alleged violations occurred. It is also curious that the government failed to make any efforts to obtain the identities of the passengers who are the alleged victims in this case – the court finds it hard to believe that the government was completely unaware of the existence of the sign-in sheets and video surveillance system.”

The comments come from U.S. District Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp on a decision granting summary judgment for Mary Susan Pine. She had been charged with a violation of the Federal Access to Clinic Entrances law and could have been subjected to an intimidating $10,000 fine.

“The court can only wonder whether this action was the product of a concerted effort between the government and the PWC, which began well before the date of the incident at issue, to quell Ms. Pine’s activities rather than to vindicate the rights of those allegedly aggrieved by Ms. Pine’s conduct,” the judge wrote.

“The court is at a loss as to why the government chose to prosecute this particular case in the first place,” Ryskamp wrote.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Unsafe Illinois Abortion Clinic Closes Permanently

After being shut down by the Illinois Dept. of Public Health in September, the Northern Illinois Women's Center in Rockford officially announced its demise following years of vigilant prayers and sidewalk counseling by local pro-life activists.

For background, read Pro-lifers Assaulted at Rockford Abortion Clinic

UPDATE 1/21/12: Illinois Abortion Clinics Passed without Inspections



-- From "Stateline's Only Abortion Clinic to Close Permanently" by Stephen Johnson & Tina Stein, WIFR-TV23 1/13/12

The director is quoted as saying the decision comes in light of lack of support from the community, political climate surrounding abortion issues, and the challenge of rebuilding staff. Just last week the Illinois Department of Public Health announced the center could reopen since it had fixed health and safety concerns that shut it down in Sept.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Rockford abortion clinic closing draws reaction from both sides" by Corina Curry, Rockford Register Star 1/13/12

[The State] gave the clinic two options. It could reopen, pay a $9,750 fine and be subject to immediate license revocation if it breached certain state regulations. Or the clinic could pay a $1,000 fine, voluntarily relinquish its operating license and close.

The clinic at 1400 Broadway was the region’s sole abortion clinic. The closest clinics to the Rockford area are in Madison, Wis., 70 miles north, or about 70 miles to the east in the Chicago suburbs.

The clinic has been the site of weekly protests from anti-abortion advocates who often carry signs with anti-abortion messages on the sidewalks outside the Broadway building, praying for the end of abortion and encouraging patients to change their minds about getting an abortion.

“The city has always been committed to make certain during the operation of the clinic that residents wanting to express their First Amendment rights are safe and free to do so,” said city Legal Director Patrick Hayes.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Abortion Biz in Rockford, Illinois Shut Down Permanently" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 1/13/12

The state health department report found the Northern Illinois Women’s Center abortion business violated the stipulations of the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center Licensing Requirements Code and Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, which makes abortion centers abide by the same rules and regulations that apply to legitimate medical centers doing outpatient surgeries.

Stephenson County Right To Life applauded the news in a statement: “NIWC said they would not reopen for many reasons, one of which is “lack of support”. Certainly their inability or their unwillingness to comply with existing laws is one of the major factors in their own demise. Some in the pro-abortion group would like to blame the pro-life community for this occurrence. Their unprofessionalism, their blatant disregard for the laws, and their lack of concern for the health and safety of women, to the point of contempt towards women, is another major part of this closing.”

“The staff of the Rockford Pro-Life Initiative and the Pro Life Corner would like to take this opportunity to thank all of the prayer warriors, sidewalk counselors, and the countless individuals who worked and prayed so hard to bring light and truth to the Rockford area,” it continued.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Prayer Vigil Saves Babies & Mothers from Abortion

The eighth annual "40 Days for Life" campaign to end abortion launches September 28 at an unprecedented 301 locations worldwide. Local volunteers are set to begin constant 24-hour prayer vigils outside abortion clinics in their respective cities from September 28 until November 6. Participants have also pledged to fast and pray privately during the crusade and to take part in community outreach programs as well.

For background, read Abortion Prayer Vigil Nationwide: 40 Days for Life

UPDATE 8/2/11: Late-term Abortion Clinic Closed by Prayer Vigil



-- From "Baby saved from abortion in very first hour after clinic opened at Michigan 40 Days campaign" by Shawn Carney, 40 Days for Life Campaign Director 9/30/11

“Alison, one of our core team members, said this save took place in the very first hour the abortion clinic was open after our campaign began,” Lisa said [from Grand Rapids, MI]. This is the fifth 40 Days for Life vigil at this location.

“We are blessed in Indianapolis to be able to share the love of Christ as we help women who have chosen life under difficult circumstances,” [Eileen Hartman] said. “We don’t walk away from these women after they have given birth. They know they can call on us long after their baby is born.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "'40 Days for Life' draws support, and one protester" by Al Edenloff, Alexandria Echo Press (Minnesota) 10/7/11

David Bereit, national director of “40 Days for Life,” stopped in Alexandria Wednesday to meet with participants in a vigil to end abortion.

A lone protester across the street from the “40 Days for Life” group repeatedly shouted into a bullhorn, saying it was wrong to try to “legislate morality.” He also criticized the group for supporting Republican candidates who were “against the poor.”

“40 Days for Life” is a grassroots effort that invites local people to pray and fast for an end to abortion; hold constant, peaceful vigils outside abortion facilities and Planned Parenthood offices; and participate in community outreach.

"I am thrilled that people of faith and conscience across Minnesota are enthusiastically responding to this call to join the largest pro-life outreach effort in history," said Bereit in a news release, "and I very much look forward to speaking – and praying – with people launching local 40 Days for Life campaigns across the state."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pro-Life Group Launches 40-day Prayer Vigil" by Rebecca Terrell, New American 9/27/11

The campaign website explains 40 Days for Life "takes a determined, peaceful approach to showing local communities the consequences of abortion in their own neighborhoods, for their own friends and families." Forty-eight new locations have been added to this year's international event, including cities in Argentina, Puerto Rico, and Germany.

Campaign organizers boast phenomenal success in the past, and they have high hopes for this year's substantially larger crusade. Campaign director Shawn Carney observed, "I often go back to those wonderful numbers — 4,313 lives saved from abortion, 53 clinic workers who've left the abortion industry, and 16 abortion centers that have gone out of business after 40 Days for Life's peaceful prayer vigils were held in the public right-of-way outside their doors." He anticipates tens of thousands will participate this year.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "40 Days for Life vigil begins" by Bill Sherman, Tulsa World Religion Writer 10/1/11

The rally was held at the Garden of Hope, a park owned by the Catholic Diocese of Tulsa across the street from Reproductive Services, 6136 E. 32nd Place, Tulsa's only abortion provider.

Speaker Tony Lauinger, chairman of Oklahomans for Life, compared America's more than 50 million abortions since 1973 to the Holocaust.

Anthony Keiser with the Family Life Office of the Diocese of Tulsa said 500 to 1,000 people from several denominations will fill one-hour time slots to pray around the clock for 40 days at the park.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Anti-abortion effort begins 40-day vigil" by Sarah Garfinkel, Peoria Journal Star 9/28/11

Each day, individuals will stand outside National Health Care, 7405 N. University St., protesting the legal abortions performed there.

This is the fourth year 40 Days for Life has been held in Peoria. It began in Texas in 2004 and uses three components in its campaign to bring an end to abortion: prayer and fasting, constant vigil and community outreach.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "40 Days for Life set for next campaign" Jennifer Hatcher, Baptist Press 9/26/11

As a community effort, 40 Days for Life uses three components in its campaigns, Bereit said. Participants 1) pray and fast to end abortion, 2) participate in vigils and 3) have grassroots community outreach.

"We provide daily devotionals for prayer," he said. "For fasting, we leave it up to them, because it is a very personal thing."

The effort follows a pattern of biblical history in which God used 40-day periods to teach His people to recognize His power and trust in Him, 40 Days for Life officials say.

"My ultimate hope is to see abortion ended through the faithfulness of God's people," Bereit said.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Obama Admin. Targets Pro-lifers for Prosecution

The Department of Justice is now prosecuting a 79-year-old grandfather. The reason: Richard Retta walks alongside women on the sidewalk outside a Planned Parenthood abortion facility and offers women hope that they can carry their babies to term.

The Department of Justice's civil rights division has filed more civil cases against pro-life sidewalk counselors during Barack Obama's administration than the previous administration.

For background, read White House Targets Pro-lifers with Lawsuits

-- From "Justice Department Tougher On Abortion Protesters" by Carrie Johnson, NPR 9/1/11

The Obama Justice Department has been taking a more aggressive approach against people who block access to abortion clinics, using a 1994 law to bring cases in greater numbers than its predecessor.

Over the past two years, the Justice Department and FBI have been meeting with abortion-rights groups and medical providers all over the country to explain their work and talk about a federal task force designed to prevent violence against doctors and women seeking abortions.

. . . [Richard] Retta, who has seven children and 11 grandkids, says he is moved by his Catholic faith to do what he calls sidewalk counseling. Retta says he has gotten pushed around outside the clinic, too. He says he was standing by the gate and a woman sprayed him with pepper spray in July, putting him "out of commission" for a while.

"I have First Amendment rights to offer women information," he says. "I have a right to talk to the women."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Obama Admin. Pursues Civil Cases Against Pro-life Street Counselors" by Stephanie Samuel, Christian Post Reporter 9/3/11

The Justice Department (DOJ) has filed eight cases against pro-lifers under the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances, or FACE, Act in the nearly three years that Obama has served as president. The number seems small on its own. However it is a huge increase when compared to the one case filed during the eight years President George W. Bush served in office

Life Legal Defense Foundation Executive Director Dana Cody said abortion clinics are determined to silence the pro-life opposition.

She explained that Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers "do not like the fact that there's people out there [doing] what they call sidewalk counseling because women change their mind and they don't go in and purchase an abortions. So it cuts into their business."

The clinics demonize pro-lifers in the public's eyes in order to keep street counselors away from their patients.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Planned Parenthood Backs Obama Admin Targeting Pro-Lifers" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 9/2/11

. . . Obama officials are suing Retta for $10,000 for violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, and is ordering him to pay compensatory damages of $5,000 each to three supposed victims of Retta handing out information and telling women to not have an abortion.

The Obama administration’s lawsuit came months after it partnered with leading pro-abortion organizations to host an FBI training seminar with the main focus of declaring as “violent” the free speech activities of pro-life Americans.

On August 25, 2010, the FBI and the United States Department of Justice co-sponsored a training seminar with Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation and the Feminist Majority Foundation.

FBI and Obama administration officials provided participants with an 84-page document entitled “Resource Guide: Violence Against Reproductive Health Care Providers” that contained print copies of Power Point presentations prepared by the Justice Department and an analysis of alleged pro-life “violence” prepared by the pro-abortion groups.

The so-called violence perpetrated by pro-life advocates mostly contained examples of constitutionally-protected free speech, including activities such as praying,

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "A Politicized Justice Department Strikes Again" by Hans A. von Spakovsky, posted at National Review Online 8/17/11

Retta estimates that he and other volunteers have helped more than 1,300 women change their minds about abortion. But that kind of success seems to be too much for this administration. It is so committed to the agenda of abortion groups that it threatened to shut down the entire government during the budget debate earlier this year to preserve more than $300 million in federal funds for Planned Parenthood. It also has threatened to cut off Medicaid funds to states like Indiana that ban state grants to the organization.

. . . the FACE Act (18 U.S.C. § 248) forbids only physical obstruction, intimidation, or the use or threat of force. The FACE Act protects the activity that Retta engaged in: The statute specifically states that it does not “prohibit any expressive conduct (including peaceful picketing or other peaceful demonstration).”

Retta was not dressed in a black paramilitary uniform, he was not carrying a nightstick, and he was not yelling racial epithets or blocking the entrance to a polling place. Yet this is the same Justice Department that dismissed a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther party, whose members engaged in exactly that behavior. Somehow the behavior and speech of a 79-year-old sidewalk counselor violates federal law against intimidation, but the speech and behavior of the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia in 2008 was just fine, according to the skewed perspective of the liberals who inhabit the Civil Rights Division these days.

To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.

Court Shields Women From Abortion Clinic Escorts

The very liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco unanimously ruled that the Oakland "medical safety zones" ordinance that limits pro-life counselors from approaching women entering an abortion clinic must be equally enforced against clinic advocates attempting to shield the women from the pro-lifers.

-- From "Court holds all abortion demonstrators equal under Oakland 'bubble ordinance'" by Sean Maher, Oakland Tribune 7/28/11

A city law aimed at protecting women from anti-abortion activists outside medical clinics was upheld Thursday by a federal court that ordered the law must also restrict the behavior of volunteer escorts who help guide women into those clinics.

Oakland's "bubble ordinance," passed in 2007, creates a 100-foot zone around entrances to the city's reproductive health clinics. Within that bubble, it is illegal to come within 8 feet of anyone trying to enter the clinic "for the purpose of counseling, harassing, or interfering with (him or her)." That restriction goes away if a demonstrator simply asks, "May I speak with you?" and the person says OK.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ordinance but agreed that enforcement must go both ways: Escorts must get permission to contact people entering the clinics before doing anything else.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "City Chastised for Taking Sides in Abortion Debate" by Tim Hull, Court House News Service 7/29/11

Though the city lets independent "escorts" help women enter clinics unmolested, it fined a man under the so-called "bubble ordinance" for trying to counsel the same women against having an abortion, the federal appeals court found. . . .

Walter Hoye, a minister and self-described "sidewalk counselor," opposes abortion and seeks to convince women to eschew the procedure. After being convicted of two separate violations of the ordinance, he filed a federal complaint alleging violations of his free-speech and due-process rights.

Hoye also alleged that the "escorts" often tell women not to listen to him or take his literature, and they attempt to block his message by putting up barriers and making noise, the ruling states.

While the ordinance, modeled after a Colorado law upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court more than a decade ago in Hill v. Colorado, is constitutional, Oakland failed to enforce it properly, the 9th Circuit found.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Appeals Court Upholds Pro-Life Pastor’s Free Speech Rights" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 7/29/11

Hoye, a pastor who has highlighted the problem of high abortion rates in the African-American community, saw his rights to provide abortion alternatives information to women outside local abortion facilities denied . . .

Although Hoye scrupulously followed the law, he has suffered arrest, prosecution and imprisonment due to Oakland’s determination to shut out his message, while abortion facility staff have never been prosecuted. However, the appeals court concluded, “Oakland’s enforcement policy is a constitutionally invalid, content-based regulation of speech.”

LLDF Legal Director Katie Short told LifeNews.com the decision is also a victory for pro-life advocates because it limits the effect of a ruling in a case in Colorado, the Hill decision, that also limited the free speech rights of pro-life advocates. While the opinion also stated “we do not find any relevant differences between the Ordinance’s purpose and text and those of the Colorado statute that the Supreme Court held to be constitutional in Hill,” the Court noted that the reasoning of the Hill decision “has been criticized by scholars of various stripes.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Planned Parenthood Loses to Illinois Pro-lifers

Pro-life advocates won major concessions from the city of Aurora [Illinois] to continue their pro-life witness and sidewalk counseling outside a Planned Parenthood facility, thus concluding their two year fight for their First Amendment rights.

UPDATE 3/31/10: Only ONE mainstream media article has been published on this pro-life court win

-- From "Pro-Life Protestors Win Key Demands From City of Aurora in Settlement" by Peter J. Smith, LifeSiteNews.com 3/25/10

Attorneys for the Thomas More Society, representing Fox Valley Families Against Planned Parenthood and the Pro-Life Action League, successfully settled with the city in federal court in Chicago on Thursday, voluntarily dismissing their First Amendment lawsuit filed in 2007 to protect the rights of citizens who pray and protest at the city’s Planned Parenthood facility, one of the largest abortion clinics in the United States.

Under the settlement’s agreements, the City of Aurora will amend two ordinances that the law firm claimed were unconstitutional, and mandate First Amendment and non-discriminatory law enforcement training for Aurora police. The settlement also establishes a grievance process to handle disputes between the protesters and Aurora officials.

The settlement guarantees that any street signs prohibiting “picketing or protesting” will be removed from the city. Pro-life individuals are guaranteed the right to use public sidewalks and parkways for peaceful prayer and protest.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Thomas More Society Settles Federal Lawsuit Against City of Aurora" posted by Stephanie Lewis, Christian Newswire 3/24/10

Some of the more detailed provisions of the settlement include:

Signs with Graphic Content: Graphic signs may be used in demonstrations, with appropriate warning signs displayed to alert passers-by.

Sidewalk Construction: To assure public safety, Aurora will take necessary steps to ensure a public sidewalk is constructed along the access road.

Case No. 07 C 4803 - Fox Valley Families Against Planned Parenthood, Pro-Life Action League, and Eric Scheidler v. The City of Aurora

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.