State sued for limiting speech that opposes abortion

By Bob Unruh

2022 March for Life (video screenshot)
2022 March for Life (video screenshot)

Colorado has a long-established record of being pro-abortion. In fact, in a post-Roe world it now promotes itself as a destination for those seeking to destroy their unborn children.

And the legislature, majority Democrat, previously voted that there are never any “rights” for the unborn in the state.

But a new lawsuit charges that the state, led by Democrat homosexual Gov. Jared Polis, has gone too far by limiting what is said about abortion near abortion businesses based on the viewpoint.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

First Liberty Institute and the law firm Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, have filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Wendy Faustin, a pro-life advocate and sidewalk counselor, in the United States District Court of Colorado.

The case charges that state and local restrictions on engaging in speech outside of abortion centers violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

“The government may not target life-affirming speech simply because it disagrees with the message. That is unlawful viewpoint discrimination,” said Roger Byron, senior counsel for First Liberty Institute. ““It should not be a crime to lovingly and compassionately approach another person to tell them about alternatives to abortion.”

Charles Cooper, of Cooper & Kirk, added, “The First Amendment presumes it is unconstitutional for the government to restrict a private citizen’s expression because of ‘its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content.’ The laws imposed by Colorado and Denver favor one message over another. That’s unconstitutional.”

First Liberty explained the background, that, “Wendy Faustin believes that life begins at conception, that all human life has God-given worth and dignity, and that ending the life of the unborn is morally wrong. She feels compelled by these beliefs to advocate publicly on behalf of the unborn and provide loving help and counsel to women considering abortion.”

But, the legal team explained, “State law and a local ordinance prohibit ‘knowingly approach[ing] another person within eight feet’ on streets or sidewalks within a 100 foot radius of the entrance to a ‘health-care facility’ – i.e., an abortion center – ‘for the purpose of passing a leaflet or handbill to . . . , or engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling with such other person.'”

The institute noted that Colorado’s law was upheld decades ago by the Supreme Court, but it explained that the ruling “distorted First Amendment doctrines” and intervening cases make clear it should be overturned.

Faustin, “Therefore institutes this litigation to vindicate her First Amendment rights and to seek to have Hill overruled,” the team said.

“The First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause guarantees the fundamental right of ‘those who share an abiding moral or religious conviction (or, for that matter, simply a biological appreciation) that abortion is the taking of a human life’ to try ‘to persuade women, one by one, not to make that choice’ in ‘the most effective place, if not the only place, where that persuasion can occur’ – ‘outside the entrances to abortion facilities,” the briefing charges.

WND is now on Trump’s Truth Social! Follow us @WNDNews

In fact, Justice Antonin Scalia, at the time, affirmed that this “freedom to speak and persuade is inseparable from, and antecedent to, the survival of self-government.”

The complaint explains Faustin “believes that abortion is a horrific moral wrong” and she wishes to try to persuade women “in the only place and at the only time she realistically can: outside of the abortion clinic, in the last few minute before they obtain the abortion.”

But the state of Colorado and city of Denver have imposed a viewpoint-based program of discrimination, banning such discussions.

“Defendants’ ban on approaching women outside of abortion clinics to speak with them unquestionably discriminates based on the content – and even the viewpoint – of speech,” the filing explains.

Quoting Scalia, it noted, “Suffice it to say that if protecting people from unwelcome communications … is a compelling state interest, the First Amendment is a dead letter.”

IMPORTANT NOTE: “Election denier!” “Science denier!” “Climate-change denier!” “Conspiracy theorist!” And then there’s “hate speech,” “fake news,” “disinformation,” “misinformation,” even something called “MALinformation.” A bizarre new lexicon has been conjured up by America’s elites, the SOLE PURPOSE of which is to discredit and ridicule – and if at all possible, CENSOR ENTIRELY – speech that doesn’t support their increasingly dark and deranged agenda. Tucker Carlson is just the latest.

In the greatest imaginable irony, the nation once boasting the most robust culture of freedom of speech and the press – undergirded by the strongest constitutional protections for those rights – is now ground zero for a total war on free expression.

How could this possibly happen in the United States of America? It’s all explained as never before in the sensational new issue of WND’s critically acclaimed WHISTLEBLOWER magazine, titled “THE ELITES’ ALL-OUT WAR ON FREE SPEECH.” WHISTLEBLOWER is available in both the popular print edition and a state-of-the-art digital version, either single issues or discounted annual subscriptions.

For 25 years, WND has boldly brought you the news that really matters. If you appreciate our Christian journalists and their uniquely truthful reporting and analysis, please help us by becoming a WND Insider!

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

Leave a Comment