{"id":188820,"date":"2018-09-21T16:43:35","date_gmt":"2018-09-21T21:43:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=188820"},"modified":"2018-09-21T14:50:41","modified_gmt":"2018-09-21T19:50:41","slug":"court-strikes-law-hawaii-pregnancy-centers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/court-strikes-law-hawaii-pregnancy-centers\/","title":{"rendered":"Court strikes down law forcing Hawaii pregnancy centers to promote abortion"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Pregnancy resource centers in Hawaii have had their free speech upheld in the case of Calvary Chapel Pearl Harbor v. Suzuki<\/i>,\u00a0a case which challenged Senate Bill 501 (later named Act 200)<\/a>, a bill which Alliance Defending Freedom says “required pro-life pregnancy centers to direct women to a state agency that provides abortion referrals and funding.” ADF noted in its press release<\/a>\u00a0that the Act “would have required pro-life centers to post large signs or provide notice to clients that the state of Hawaii ‘has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services,’ which include abortion-inducing drugs.”<\/p>\n

U.S. District Judge Derrick K. Watson issued a permanent injunction<\/a> against Act 200 in light of the Supreme Court decision, NIFLA v. Becerra<\/em>, which found<\/a> that the government of California could not compel\u00a0pro-life pregnancy resource centers to promote abortion.<\/p>\n

The U.S. Supreme Court noted in its majority opinion, “Even if the State had presented a non-hypothetical justification, the FACT Act unduly burdens protected speech. It imposes a government-scripted, speaker-based disclosure requirement that is wholly disconnected from the State\u2019s informational interest.\u2026 [I]t requires these clinics to disclose information about state-sponsored services\u2014 including abortion, anything but an ‘uncontroversial’ topic.”<\/p>\n