Nancy Pearcey: SCOTUS on Pregnancy Centers -- Gov't May Not Compel Speech
The Pearcey Report Editor at Large Nancy Pearcey writes at CNSNews:
Can the government force an organization to advertise for its competitors?
The Supreme Court says no.
The case, NIFLA v. Becerra, involved a California law that forced licensed pregnancy centers to advertise for state-funded abortion clinics. The law specified how large the sign had to be, and even dictated the words to be used. It required the sign to be placed inside the center, on its website, and in all advertising. It even required centers to provide the telephone number of state agencies that could connect women to abortion providers.
The effect of the law was essentially to crowd out the center's own message.
The Court struck down the law as a violation of the First Amendment. In the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said, "California cannot co-opt the licensed facilities [pregnancy centers] to deliver its message for it."
Here is Nancy's conclusion: "The NIFLA ruling is a big win against compelled speech. It affirms that the government may not coerce individuals to promote a message with which they disagree.
"Whether you oppose abortion or favor it, whether you are conservative or liberal, we should all be glad that the Supreme Court has taken a stand for freedom of speech."
Read the entire column by Nancy Pearcey
