(LifeSiteNews) — On Friday, a California court will hear a motion to dismiss the state’s lawsuit against pro-life pregnancy centers to stop them from spreading information about abortion pill reversal (APR), for lack of evidence that the life-saving information is actually harmful.
The abortion pill mifepristone (better known as RU-486) works by blocking the natural hormone progesterone that developing babies need to survive. APR consists of administering extra progesterone to counteract mifepristone’s effects, ideally within 24 hours of taking the abortion pill.
In 2023, Democrat Attorney General Rob Bonta went after Heartbeat International and RealOptions Obria Medical Clinics, the latter of which runs a chain of counseling centers in the northern part of California, accusing them of violating the state’s False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law, seeking an injunction blocking them from promoting APR.
Legal firms specializing in religious liberty, such as Thomas More Society and Alliance Defending Freedom, rose to defend the pregnancy help organizations, saying that Bonta’s actions constituted censorship, not consumer protection.
Thomas More has announced that a summary judgment hearing in the case was scheduled for April 17, where they sought dismissal of California’s lawsuit on the grounds that the state has failed to produce evidence of harm or even consumer complaints, despite having more than two years to do so.
“The state’s key harm study by Dr. Mitchell Creinin was contradicted by his own deposition testimony, showing no hemorrhaging in the APR treatment group, despite the study’s claims,” the announcement notes.
“Heartbeat International has long been committed to sharing accurate, evidence-based information—information that has the potential to save lives. Throughout this prolonged legal battle, that mission has not wavered,” declared Heartbeat International general counsel Danielle White.
“No woman should ever be backed into an abortion she does not want, and abortion pill reversal continues to offer women a meaningful choice: the opportunity to continue their pregnancies and bring their children into the world. We have weathered years of intimidation and will not be silenced. As this case finally comes before the court, we remain confident that it will be recognized for what it has always been—a sustained effort to weaponize legal authority and suppress a message the plaintiff finds objectionable. That effort has failed to stop us, and it will not succeed now,” she added.
Pro-life OB/GYN Dr. William Lile has explained that APR is based on principles that are well understood from progesterone’s common, FDA-approved use in a variety of other pregnancy-related situations. According to the Abortion Pill Rescue Network (APRN), “initial studies of APR have shown it has a 64-68% success rate.” Heartbeat International also publishes first-hand testimonials from women who have benefited from the technique.
In 2023, the academic journal Scientific Reports published a study by Franciscan University of Steubenville neuroscientist Dr. Stephen Sammut that found “progesterone, administered shortly after mifepristone, reversed the effects of mifepristone (i.e., reversed the abortion) with living fetuses present at the end of gestation in 81 percent of cases,” after months of being challenged and rejected by other publications.
“All major studies show that using progesterone to counteract a chemical abortion (Abortion Pill Reversal) can be effective since it’s the very same hormone a woman’s body produces to sustain her pregnancy,” says Heartbeat International. “One study even shows an effective rate of 80 percent. Progesterone has been safely used with pregnant women and their babies since the 1950s. To date, statistics show more than 4,500 women have had successful abortion pill reversals and that number grows higher each day.”
However, despite labeling itself “pro-choice,” the abortion movement is notoriously hostile to any and all types of alternatives to abortion, from publicity campaigns to malign crisis pregnancy centers as “deceptive,” to attempt to strip medical licenses from pro-life doctors, to violence and threats against pregnancy centers that are less likely to be prosecuted than purported cases of anti-abortion violence.

16 hours ago
55












English (US) ·