In a ruling that highlights the ongoing tension between free speech rights and public health concerns, a federal judge has temporarily blocked New York State from taking legal action against certain pregnancy counseling centers for promoting an abortion pill “reversal” method. Critics argue the method is unproven and potentially unsafe.
Temporary Injunction Issued
U.S. District Judge John Sinatra Jr., presiding in Buffalo, issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday against New York State Attorney General Letitia James and her office. The ruling prevents James from pursuing enforcement actions against two pregnancy counseling centers and a related association while their lawsuit against her is pending.
The lawsuit, brought by the National Institute for Family and Life Advocates and two of its member centers, accuses James of targeting anti-abortion groups unfairly due to their viewpoints. The centers promote the “Abortion Pill Reversal” protocol, a controversial method that claims to reverse the effects of a medication abortion.
Controversy Over Abortion Pill ‘Reversal’
Medication abortion, the most common method for terminating a pregnancy in the U.S., involves taking two drugs: mifepristone, followed by misoprostol. The reversal protocol promoted by the plaintiffs involves advising women who have taken mifepristone to forgo the second drug, misoprostol, and instead take repeated doses of progesterone.
Attorney General James’ office argues that this method is unproven and unscientific, with major medical associations warning against its use. The office contends that the promotion of such treatments constitutes consumer fraud and false advertising, as the protocol has not been approved by federal regulators like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Judge Cites Free Speech Rights
In his ruling, Judge Sinatra, a 2019 appointee of former President Donald Trump, asserted that the First Amendment protects free speech, even when that speech might include false statements. He noted that the two pregnancy centers and the related association are likely to succeed in their lawsuit, which argues that their right to “speak freely” about the reversal method is constitutionally protected.
“Plaintiffs are irreparably harmed each day that their First Amendment freedoms are infringed,” Sinatra wrote in his decision, adding that the injunction allows women access to information that could potentially save their unborn children.
