While the Supreme Court’s decision on the “travel ban” is getting most of the literal and virtual ink today, the Court also struck down the California law that required pro-life and crisis pregnancy centers to advertise where women could get abortions, as a probable violation of the First Amendment.

It was a split decision, with Justice Kennedy siding with the court conservatives.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court said that the notices for licensed facilities likely violates the First Amendment and notices for unlicensed facilities unduly burdens protected speech.

The decision was a win for the clinics, known as “crisis pregnancy centers,” which had argued the requirements under the state’s Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care and Transparency Act, or FACT Act, infringed on their speech rights, forcing them to promote a procedure they morally oppose.

“No one should be forced by the government to express a message that violates their convictions, especially on deeply divisive subjects such as abortion,” said Alliance Defending Freedom President, CEO, and General Counsel Michael Farris, who argued on behalf of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates before the Supreme Court in March.

“In this case, the government used its power to force pro-life pregnancy centers to provide free advertising for abortion. The Supreme Court said that the government can’t do that, and that it must respect pro-life beliefs.”

The law was constructed to continually fine the crisis pregnancy centers if they were found to be not in compliance.


Kennedy had signaled during oral arguments that he wasn’t buying the argument, but what is more striking is that even though the liberal justices clearly had issues with the free speech elements of the law, they just couldn’t bring themselves to rule against abortion.

Favorite part of NIFLA is J. Kennedy's concurring opinion in which he tells California it isn't forward thinking. pic.twitter.com/1ij8bqd3na

— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) June 26, 2018

BTW, NIFLA v. Becerra is more likely to have far-reaching consequences than Trump v. Hawaii.

The circuits applying a "professional speech" exception to the ordinary scrutiny applied in speech cases (3d, 4th, 9th Cirs.) are going to have to make some adjustments.

— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) June 26, 2018

Naturally, Planned Parenthood is crying on Twitter.

JUST IN: SCOTUS voted 5-4 in favor of fake women's health centers. Despite today's ruling, know that we will never stop fighting for everyone’s right to have medically accurate information about all of their options. #EndTheLies https://t.co/IyULv1FhDD

— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) June 26, 2018

Let’s be clear: fake women’s health centers are deceptive and harmful to women — lying to women, withholding medical information, and cutting off access to care. Nothing in this SCOTUS decision suggests otherwise. #EndTheLies #NIFLAvBecerra

— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) June 26, 2018

The entire decision can be read here, but it’s clearly a win for pro-life groups, and yet another slam on California, their current Attorney General Xavier Becerra, and the Ninth Circuit.

And a win for free, uncompelled-by-the-state speech.