Abortion foes move to block online ads for reproductive services [View all]
Source: Politico
HEALTH CARE
Abortion foes move to block online ads for reproductive services
Digital ad platforms consider their legal risk in a post-Roe U.S.
By RUTH READER
07/16/2022 07:00 AM EDT
Updated: 07/16/2022 09:56 AM EDT
Opponents of abortion rights are looking at the next phase in their campaign to stop people from ending their pregnancies -- and they're targeting the advertising of abortion services. ... The National Right to Life Committee is lobbying states to enact legislation it's drafted that would make it a crime to advertise information about abortion pills or other methods of ending a pregnancy. The model bill treats abortion like organized crime, by using a combination of civil and criminal penalties in the same way that the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act does. The scope is broad and suggests penalizing anyone who even conveys information about the procedure. State lawmakers in Indiana and South Carolina have already shown interest. ... Proponents of abortion rights said the First Amendment and a Supreme Court precedent should protect advertisers, but the court's adherence to precedent is in flux. The lack of clarity could weigh on risk-averse online advertising platforms.
{snip}
Under the National Right to Life Committee's proposed legislation, Google's web-hosting service could be in trouble, said Florida State University law professor Mary Ziegler. Likewise, Facebook could potentially be liable for any user-generated content promoting abortion that's aimed at people in states where those services are illegal. ... While these platforms continue to host abortion-related advertising, the abortion-rights advocacy group Plan C said that getting ads promoting abortion services approved on them is arduous and getting more so.
{snip}
The biggest concern for digital advertising platforms in the short term are laws, similar to those in the National Right to Life Committee's proposal, in Oklahoma and Texas that permit civil suits against anyone who helps someone else get an abortion. ... Both states allow residents to sue parties that aid or abet an abortion with damages set at a minimum of $10,000. While the laws specify that paying for an abortion qualifies as aiding and abetting, legal experts say the laws could extend to advertising.
{snip}
There's also a Supreme Court precedent protecting advertisers. Prior to the Roe v. Wade decision, somes states explicitly banned advertising for abortion services. In 1971, Jeffrey Cole Bigelow, editor for an underground Charlottesville-based magazine called Virginia Weekly, ran an ad for an abortion clinic in New York, despite a Virginia law that made it a misdemeanor to "encourage or prompt the procuring of abortion." Bigelow was arrested and convicted, but his case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, which ruled in his favor. ... In the majority opinion, then-Justice Harry Blackmun wrote that the advertisement wasn't promoting a simple commercial transaction. "It contained factual material of clear public import" and was entitled to First Amendment protection, he wrote. However, the ruling came at a time when the court was sympathetic to abortion rights, having granted them constitutional protection two years earlier in the Roe decision. The current court may feel differently.
{snip}
Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/16/abortion-foes-move-to-block-online-ads-for-reproductive-services-00046195
Hat tip, Joe.My.God.
Christian Group Seeks To Outlaw Ads For Abortion Pills
July 16, 2022
https://www.joemygod.com/2022/07/christian-group-seeks-outlaw-ads-for-abortion-pills/
-- -- -- -- -- --
Oh! They can't do that. It's ...
It's what? Unprecedented?
-- -- -- -- -- --
Jeffrey Cole BIGELOW, Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/421/809
-- -- -- -- -- --
Bigelow v. Virginia (1975)
https://www.mtsu.edu:8443/first-amendment/article/194/bigelow-v-virginia
= new reply since forum marked as read