成人X站

Health clinics backed by pro-life organizations were a focus of the Supreme Court this week.

Are they pregnancy centers or faith-based 鈥榝ronts鈥�?

Justices heard arguments over whether a California law that forces anti-abortion pregnancy centers to provide information about abortion is legal.

Those opposed to the clinics point out that while they are presented as healthcare providers, they only provide certain services.

The legal question is, can a clinic be required to provide information on behalf of the state?

In King County, faith-based health centers are now required to post signs notifying clients they are not full-service medical centers. The King County Board of Health voted in favor of the rule last year. It is meant to ensure pregnant women get complete, timely, and accurate information.

County board member and Seattle Councilmember Debora Juarez said at the time individuals should be aware whether or not they are at a full-service medical facility.

The only county council member to disagree was Kathy Lambert. Lambert said the facilities provide information based on public health documents accepted by the medical community.

鈥淚t boils down to the fact that they will not be encouraging or setting up abortions,鈥� Lambert said.

Faith-based clinics and the law

The California law goes further than King County’s.

“They have to provide specified disclosure about the availability of abortion,” former state Attorney General Rob McKenna told Seattle’s Morning News. “This is at the heart of the First Amendment question. Under it, your right to free speech is protected, but so is the right not to be forcibly associated with other people’s speech.”

Conservative and liberal justices this week questioned the law. Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor were reportedly troubled by some aspects of it. Kagan said the state “gerrymandered” the law to target anti-abortion centers.

Those arguing for the state say that the law doesn’t target the centers. Rather it targets women who may be unaware they have access to abortion, as well as prenatal and delivery care, no matter what their financial situation.

In the past, the court has upheld requirements that doctors in abortion clinics tell patients about alternatives, The Associated Press reports.

鈥淚f a pro-life state can tell a doctor you have to tell people about adoption, why can鈥檛 a pro-choice state say you have to tell people about an abortion?鈥� Justice Stephen Breyer asked Michael Farris, representing the centers.

The Supreme Court is expected to decide whether California’s law is legal sometime in the next few months.

If the law is struck down, it could end others throughout the country, calling into question laws that seek to regulate doctors’ speech.

Listen to the conversation with McKenna here.